Greater Golden Horseshoe Transportation Plan

Greater Golden Horseshoe Transportation Plan Transportation Profile November 2017 PREPARED BY Urban Strategies Inc. and HDR for the Ministry of Transportation

Prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. and HDR for the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) in support of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Transportation Plan. The Ontario Ministry of Transportation is developing a long-term and comprehensive transportation plan for the GGH. A functioning, efficient, and well-planned transportation system is vital to keep the population and economy of the GGH moving. To support the development of the GGH transportation plan, it is important to build an understanding of how the GGH transportation system has evolved in the past and how its needs might change in the future. This working paper provides a transportation profile of the GGH as a foundational input to the GGH transportation plan.

Table of Contents Executive Summary 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Transportation System 2 Evolution of the Transportation System in the GGH Region 2 Existing Transportation System and Service 4 3.0 Transportation Planning Framework and Key Players 12 Provincial Direction 12 Transportation Players 18 4.0 Existing Conditions & Trends 23 Moving People 23 Moving Goods 34 5.0 Influencing Factors 43 Changing Landscape of Employment 43 Increasing Levels of Congestion 44 Maturation of the Region 46 Shifting Trends in Goods Movement 48 Changing Technologies and Service Models 49 6.0 Future Outlooks and Considerations for the Transportation Network 52 A Changing Economy 52 A Growing Region 55 Increasing Pressure on Sustainability and Health 56 Rapidly Advancing Technologies 57 Appendix 61 Image Sources 69

1.0 Introduction The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is developing a bold new long-range transportation plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). It will look out to 2051 and beyond, and ensure that the transportation system of the future supports continued prosperity and quality of life, and is responsive to current and future environmental, economic, and social needs. This Transportation Profile is one in a series of three profiles being developed to provide background to and inform the development of the plan. It is complemented by a socioeconomic profile and an environmental profile of the region. The GGH is key to the economic prosperity of Ontario and Canada, and transportation is an important enabler of the region s competitiveness. The GGH is strategically situated at the crossroads of Canadian and American trade, within a day s drive of approximately 135 million people, part of the Ontario-Quebec Trade Corridor, and connecting the only major road and rail routes between eastern and western Canada. It hosts Pearson International Airport, Canada s busiest airport for passengers and goods, as well as Hamilton International Airport, the third biggest airport in Canada for goods movement. Its ports and railways facilitate the movement of goods to, from, and through the region. The GGH transportation system also serves the needs of a diverse population and is inextricably linked to our patterns of living and working. The reciprocal relationship between transportation and growth across the GGH is evident. This paper begins by describing the existing transportation system in the GGH: its evolution, components, and current initiatives to expand and improve it. The next section details the plans and players that keep the system in operation and guide its development. The paper then provides an overview of the existing conditions and recent trends impacting various components of the transportation system, from roads to transit, to ports and airports. It is followed by a look at some of the key influences that have contributed to the changes we are seeing in transportation today, and concludes with a summation of the future outlooks and considerations for the development of the plan. INTRODUCTION TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 1

2.0 Transportation System The GGH transportation system is comprised of road, rail, marine, air, bicycle, and pedestrian networks, with major nodes and hubs such as terminals, ports, and airports that function as gateways, and facilitate transfer between these modes. It provides for the movement of people and goods through the region with each of the sub-systems interacting with one another. The major components of the GGH transportation system can be seen in Figure 1. This section describes some of the factors that have helped to shape the region, and how people and goods move within it. It then presents greater detail of each existing component in the existing transportation system. Evolution of the Transportation System in the GGH Region The growth of the GGH has a fundamental relationship with the evolution of its transportation system. Historically, the GGH developed as a series of separate urban centres, geographically distinct from one another. Originally, these centres coalesced around waterways and ports, which facilitated manufacturing and the convenient shipment of goods. With the advent of the rail network, major terminals emerged as areas of commerce, reinforcing existing centres of growth including places such as Toronto and Hamilton. Railways ushered in a new pattern of development by facilitating the growth of centres further from ports and waterways. These centres grew largely independently of each other, connected primarily by a limited transportation network consisting of provincial highways and roads in addition to rail. The result was a settlement pattern comprised of compact living and working centres set within rural and natural landscapes. The development of the controlled access highway network starting in the 1930s, and the post-world War II housing boom, gave rise to a significant change in settlement patterns. While cars and the new highway network afforded greater mobility, particularly in more rural areas, they also made it possible for people to live much further from existing centres. As the population grew, housing and jobs spread out along these highway corridors and over time development began to fill the gaps between what were once a series of more distinct centres. Employment areas that were once focused in the centres, usually related to rail and ports, began to develop along the highway corridors. Greenfield areas along highways, where land was cheap and easily accessible by road, began developing into business parks that could attract employees and facilitate the movement of goods along the region s highway corridors. 2 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

THE GGH TODAY Legend Figure 1. Key components of the GGH transportation system TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 3

As the region grew, the number of people traveling from greater distances into and out of downtown Toronto for work increased. GO Transit began as a three-year experiment in 1967 on a single rail line along the Lakeshore corridor to provide transit for people living between Oakville and Pickering with rush hour service to Hamilton. Over the 1970s and 80s, expansion continued and new lines were added, creating what is today a radial network comprised of seven lines fanning out from Union Station, including complementary bus services. Besides this commuter rail transit development, the growth of transit in the region included the development of a metro rail and subway system largely focused at the Toronto city centre, and supplemented by bus services. Elsewhere in the GGH, individual cities and local municipalities began providing their own bus transit services to meet the needs of their residents. These primarily served local and intramunicipal travel destinations, and fed trips leading to and from GO rail stations in their service areas. More recently, there has been increased focus on active transportation, particularly walking and cycling, as part of a multimodal transportation system. > Ajax GO Station - Many municipal and regional transit agencies were started as a means of providing access to intra-municipal travel destinations, and feeding users to and from GO rail stations. Existing Transportation System and Service Roads Provincial Highways The primary highway network in the GGH is the provincial highway network. King s Highways are numbered from 2 to 427 and include the network of controlled-access highways, generally known as 400-series highways (and which also include the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW)) that cover the southern portion of Ontario and run throughout the GGH. The 400-series highways are designed to a high standard, with a typical design speed of 120 km/h. Other King s Highways, with a speed limit of 80km/h, are used to connect towns in the other parts of the GGH. Highway 407 provides an east-west link across the region. There are also a number of tolled facilities in the province. Highway 407ETR is tolled by a private consortium, while Highway 407 East, Highway 412, and in the future Highway 418 are controlled by the Province. On certain routes throughout the GGH, the highway network provides High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes (HOV), restricting the use of the lane to certain types of vehicles and/or vehicles carrying at least two passengers. There are currently 80 kilometres 1 of HOV lanes in the region, located on provincial Highways 403, 404, and the QEW, as well as over 80 free carpool lots across the Ontario provincial highway network. These lanes help manage congestion by encouraging carpooling and transit use, and dis-incentivizing travel in single occupancy vehicles, particularly during peak travel periods. In September 2016, the Ministry of Transportation designated existing HOV lanes as High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes on a section of the QEW. The HOT lanes are a pilot project aimed at reducing traffic congestion in Ontario, and will last two to four years with the aim of helping the Province learn about and plan for a more efficient highway network. 1 Pocket Guide to Transportation 2013, Ministry of Transportation 4 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

THE GGH TODAY > QEW - The introduction of HOV lanes is helping to manage congestion by encouraging carpooling and transit use. Municipal Roads The provincial highway network is complemented by systems of arterial and local roads that are maintained by the local government. Upper and lower-tier municipalities classify their road networks based on the function that every road serves. In general, regional arterial roads are the primary travel corridors within the region and are designed to support higher traffic volumes and speeds, connect with the provincial network, and provide interregional connections for people and goods. Arterial roads serve users in various modes including motorized vehicles of various sizes (including commercial vehicles), bicycles, and transit. Depending on the road, adjacent land uses, and form and function of the corridor, certain modes may receive priority over others. Historically most arterial roads have favoured the movement of motorized vehicles, however many municipalities have recently been considering how to make their arterial roads into more complete streets that provide a better balance between users. HOV lanes or alternatively reserved lanes can be found on some municipal and regional roads, and are designated by the respective Region, City, Town, or Township. Those lanes can be used for different purposes and functions, such as priority lanes for transit, bicycles, or multipassenger vehicles. The highway system together with the arterial network serves high volumes of local and regional traffic and connects with the rest of Ontario, eastern Canada, and the U.S. border. The highway network serves passenger vehicles and transit vehicles, and provides the main road connections for goods movement linking the marine ports, airports and intermodal terminals across the GGH. Highway 401 is the spine of the highway network for goods movement, connecting seven regions from Waterloo to Northumberland, while the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) provides a strategic link to Hamilton, Niagara, and the U.S. border. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 5

Rail Transportation The GGH freight railway network comprises two Class I railways, and six shortline railways. The two Class I railways, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP), and the Canadian National Railway (CN), maintain an extensive mainline network throughout the GGH and Southern Ontario. These freight carriers serve major urban centres across Canada and into the United States. Within the GGH, some lines also support VIA passenger rail and GO regional rail services. Metrolinx (GO Transit) also owns and maintains its own passenger rail network, on which GO trains generally travel separately from the CP and CN freight trains. Over the last several decades, the two major Class I rail companies have been selling and/or abandoning some rail lines that provide linkages to secondary centres. This has resulted in secondary rail lines being taken over by regional carriers (shortlines) or municipalities, or abandoned altogether and sometimes converted to community trails. Freight shortlines in the GGH are feeder services that provide a connection between industries located in secondary centres or smaller communities and the mainline Class I railways, thereby allowing local Ontario companies to directly access the North American rail network. Shortlines generally operate over short distances, as compared to Class I railways, and offer a variety of additional specialised services to their customers. > Brampton Intermodal Terminal - The region s intermodal terminals are critical in the distribution of goods arriving by rail. The rail system is both publicly and privately owned. The federal government regulates the two Class I railways and two freight shortlines (the Goderich-Exeter Railway and the Southern Ontario Railway, both owned by Genesee & Wyoming), as well as VIA Rail. The Province regulates Metrolinx (GO Rail) as well as four freight shortlines (the Orangeville Brampton Railway, the Barrie Collingwood Railway, the Port Colborne Harbour Railway, and the Guelph Junction Railway) and four heritage railways (York-Durham Heritage Railway, South Simcoe Railway, Credit Valley Explorer, and Waterloo Central Railway), all of which use federal safety standards and rules of operation through agreement. The rail system accommodates the movement of freight trains and passenger trains such as GO Trains. VIA Rail operates routes that make stops in different parts of the GGH, all of which terminate or start at Union Station in Toronto. These comprise: A route to the east, towards Kingston, Ottawa, and Montréal. Two routes to the southwest with one towards Niagara Falls continuing on to New York, and one towards London, Sarnia, and Windsor. A long-haul route to the west towards Vancouver. The rail network plays a significant role in the movement of goods to, from, and through the GGH. Locally distributed goods are exchanged between the rail network, the highway, and arterial road networks at intermodal terminals. 2 There are two major intermodal terminals in the GGH, located in Brampton and Vaughan: The CN Brampton Intermodal Terminal is Canada s largest intermodal terminal. It provides ready access to the continental Class I rail network for major nearby retail distribution centres, auto assembly plants, and other industries. CP s Vaughan Intermodal Terminal is close to concentrations of warehousing/distribution centres in nearby Bolton, in Peel Region. The planned Highway 427 Extension will provide direct freeway access to the terminal. 2 For the purposes of this profile, the term multimodal refers to the movement of people and goods by two or more modes between origin and destination for example, commuters driving to a GO station who then continue their journey to work, or a container arriving at the Port of Montréal by ship, that is then transferred by rail to the GGH, and finally delivered to its destination by truck. The term intermodal refers to the act of transferring cargo between modes, or to the location where that exchange takes place. Typically, the reference is to the intermodal exchange between rail and truck. For more information, refer to the U.S. Federal Highway Administration s Freight Glossary and Acronyms website, at https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/ fpd/glossary/#i. 6 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Legend THE GGH TODAY Figure 2. Major rail corridors, ports, airports, and intermodal terminals CP also has an express terminal in Milton that provides overnight shipment of non-reinforced truck trailers between Toronto and Montréal. CN is now proposing the development of a third major intermodal terminal in Milton. At the time of this document s publication, the CN Milton Logistics Hub proposal was being reviewed by a federal environmental assessment review panel, and by provincial, regional, and municipal authorities. Several other rail classification yards 3 are located in the GGH, and many of these allow for a smaller exchange of containers, and transloading 4 to trucks. Of note, CN s MacMillan Yard, in Vaughan, is one of the largest railroad classification yards in North America. 3 Rail classification yards are terminals at which rail cars are grouped together to form trains. (Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Freight Glossary and Acronyms, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/glossary/) 4 Transloading refers to the transfer of bulk shipments from the vehicle/container of one mode to that of another at a terminal interchange point. (Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Freight Glossary and Acronyms, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/glossary/). TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 7

Air Transportation Four GGH airports offer international or cross-border service: Toronto Pearson International Airport, Hamilton International Airport, Region of Waterloo International Airport, and Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. There are also executive airports in Oshawa and Buttonville, although the latter is expected to close in the near future. The network of airports is evolving rapidly, with significant growth and increased specialization anticipated. Toronto Pearson remains at the centre of the GGH s (and the nation s) commercial air services. While the federal government continues to examine the potential need for a second major airport in Pickering, this remains a possibility only for the medium- to longterm. Toronto Pearson is Canada s dominant airport for the movement of people and goods, in part due to its extensive cross-border and global connectivity. Hamilton International Airport (HIA) plays a large role in goods movement. It has emerged as a leader in express overnight service, given the lack of overnight flight restrictions (to which Toronto Pearson is subjected) and lower levels of road congestion. The Region of Waterloo International Airport has more limited service, focused on medium haul business travel and leisure. Billy Bishop Toronto City Centre Airport specializes in short- and medium-haul destinations within eastern North America, with the type of aircraft, and hence range of destinations, limited by the tripartite agreement and the airport s operating terms. Transport Canada is undertaking an aviation analysis of a number of southern Ontario regional airports including Pickering to determine future aviation demand for the area. > Pearson International Airport - Toronto Pearson is the region and country s dominant airport for the movement of people and goods. 8 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

THE GGH TODAY > The Port of Hamilton - The Port of Hamilton serves the GGH and southwestern Ontario as well as the steel and agri-food industries in and around Hamilton. Marine Transportation The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway System, which includes the Welland Canal, is a 3,700 kilometre, binational marine highway, providing for the movement of goods and ocean-going marine access to the interior of North America. It includes 15 major international port authorities and approximately 50 smaller ports across the system, including eight in the GGH. The three most significant public ports in the GGH are in Hamilton, Toronto and Oshawa. The Port of Hamilton serves the GGH and southwestern Ontario (including, for example, grain farmers in rural southwestern Ontario), as well as the steel and agri-food industries in and around Hamilton. The ports of Toronto and Oshawa both serve more localized markets, especially with bulk commodity shipments, such as cement for construction, road salt, and sugar and flour for food production. While the three ports are connected directly to the Class I railways, truck traffic plays a more prominent role in the distribution of goods given their local origins and destinations. Note that the GGH ports do not handle containers, which are more effectively handled through ocean ports at Halifax, Montréal, and Vancouver. The three public ports are owned and managed by Transport Canada as individual Canada Port Authorities. 5 The major privately-owned ports in the GGH are located at Oakville, Bowmanville, Clarkson, and Port Colborne. Each has a very specific and localized focus for example, Oakville focuses on unloading refined petroleum products, while Clarkson and Bowmanville serve adjacent cement plants. 6 Of note, Port Colborne in Niagara Region is located in Lake Erie at the mouth of the Welland Canal. It is a local hub for logistics, with direct connections to highways, CP and CN rail lines, and the Port Colborne Harbour Railway (a provincially-licensed shortline). The City of Port Colborne offers a variety of ship services, such as repairs and chandlering. There is also a very small port in the western part of Haldimand County on Lake Erie called the Port of Nanticoke. The GGH can access the U.S. through Lake Ontario ports in upstate New York. It also connects to the rest of the Great Lakes via the Welland Canal, which links Lake Ontario and Lake Erie. The GGH ports use the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway System to receive and ship bulk commodities (described above) among other Canadian and U.S. ports. 5 Transport Canada oversees Canada Port Authorities, sets and monitors port and marine facility service standards, establishes governance and functions, and sets and collects public port fees, among other responsibilities. See https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/ports-index.htm. 6 Metrolinx, Urban Goods Movement Discussion Paper, July 2016. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 9

Transit and Intercommunity Bus Regional Transit In the GGH, GO Transit, a division of Metrolinx, offers rail and bus service for the GTHA, with routes extending to communities across the region. GO Transit s rail service uses existing rail corridors to provide regional transit between communities along seven corridors fanning out in a radial network from the hub at Union Station in downtown Toronto. The service is operated primarily as a commuter service with four of the seven corridors only providing service during the AM and PM peak: Stouffville, Richmond Hill, Milton, and Barrie. Barrie also has limited weekend summer service beyond peak times. GO bus service offers connections to regional destinations where rail service is not available, and provides off-peak service during midday, evenings, and weekends. GO train service now operates to Niagara (seasonally) and Kitchener, which was previously offered only by the main intercity rail passenger service, VIA Rail. GO Transit has been acquiring segments of the rail lines it operates on, and today owns over 80% of the corridors where it operates. Increasing ownership is allowing GO Transit and Metrolinx to build additional infrastructure and expand their service and frequency. Local Transit Except for the railway network, only a few parts of the GGH have fixed transit corridors: the City of Toronto has a subway and streetcar network, and the first Light Rail Transit (LRT) lines within the region are currently under construction in Kitchener/Waterloo and the City of Toronto. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) routes are maintained along Highway 7 and Davis Drive in York Region, and Highway 403 in Mississauga. Besides the aforementioned rapid transit systems, the rest of the GGH is served by bus services operated by local or regional transit agencies. Some municipalities and rural counties offer para-transit, on-demand or limited shuttle services. Intercommunity bus service connects customers across a municipal boundary or between jurisdictions. In the GGH, intercommunity buses provide various types of services, including scheduled services, chartered services, tour services, and school bus services. Intercommunity bus travel is facilitated by numerous companies, including Greyhound, Coach Canada, Megabus, New York Trailways, and Ontario Northland, for connections within the GGH and other cities throughout Ontario, as well as for long-haul travel to the U.S. and the rest of Canada. The service is also offered by some rail companies including VIA Rail and Amtrak. > Meadowvale GO Station - GO Transit s rail service uses existing rail corridors to provide regional transit between communities along seven corridors fanning out in a radial network from the hub at Union Station in downtown Toronto. 10 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

> Don Valley Trail - The GGH contains Canada s largest network of hiking trails. > Rainbow Bridge, Niagara - Niagara Region contains four border crossings with the United States. Bicycle Network and Trails At the regional and local level, active transportation is facilitated through Official Plans and Transportation Master Plans which shape strategic directions by determining modal priorities, informing capital plans and protecting future rights of way. Many municipalities in the GGH have Active Transportation Master Plans or policies in their Official Plans that support the growth of active transportation infrastructure with the goal of making their urban and suburban environments more walkable and bike-friendly. These policies have resulted in a significant increase in pedestrian and cycling infrastructure at the local and regional level over the past decade. Some municipalities also offer bike share systems such as Bike Share in Toronto and SoBi in Hamilton for short trips which contribute to active transportation and transit connections. Encouraging active transportation use also helps reduce traffic congestion and air pollution from vehicles. With over 64,000 7 km of trails criss-crossing Southern Ontario and the GGH, nearly 10,000 8 of which are suitable for biking, the GGH contains Canada s largest network of hiking trails. This includes connections to the oldest and longest footpath in Canada the Bruce Trail, to the Waterfront Trail running along the Lake Ontario and Lake Erie shorelines, the Oak Ridges Moraine Trail, and TransCanada trail. The trail system supports the region s transportation network while offering opportunities for recreational activities. Border Crossings The Niagara Frontier is a major gateway that provides for a substantial percentage of cross-border movement of goods and people between Canada and the United States. There are four border crossings in Niagara Region: the Peace Bridge, the Queenston-Lewiston Bridge, the Rainbow Bridge, and the Whirlpool Rapids Bridge, which is a dedicated NEXUS crossing. The Peace Bridge is the busiest crossing for both passenger and commercial vehicles. THE GGH TODAY 7 http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/sport/recreation/a2010_trailstrategy.pdf 8 http://www.ontariotrails.on.ca/trails/activity/cycling---roads-paths TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 11

3.0 Transportation Planning Framework and Key Players The GGH transportation system has been developed by a number of key players within the context of provincial policy over time. This section begins with a broad overview of relevant provincial policies and legislation that guide planning and investment decisions related to transportation infrastructure and services across the GGH. It then provides a snapshot of the key players responsible for implementing the visions and goals set forward by the Province. Provincial Direction Growth Plan The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017), established under the Places to Grow Act (2005), sets the regional vision to which all transportation plans respond. The Growth Plan establishes a regional growth structure comprising 25 urban growth centres, a built boundary, and designated greenfield areas to reduce sprawl, protect valuable natural and agricultural resources, and plan for more complete, transit-supportive, and compact communities. Growth Plan policies require municipalities to direct growth to settlement areas and prioritize intensification, with a focus on strategic growth areas, including urban growth centres, major transit station areas, as well as brownfield sites and greyfields. The Growth Plan includes density targets for urban growth centres, designated greenfield areas, and major transit station areas, and an intensification target for the delineated built-up area. The Plan s policies protect employment areas and support the development of more compact and complete communities served by a multimodal transportation system. Growth Plan policies also require that transportation corridors be identified and protected to meet current and projected needs for various travel modes. These goals are critical to the region s prosperity. Metrolinx s Regional Transportation Plan and all municipal official plans and land use planning decisions within the GGH are required to conform with the Growth Plan. Under their respective enabling legislation, the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and Niagara Escarpment Plan were established to lay out policies for the protection of areas where growth should not occur. These plans work in conjunction with the Growth Plan. The coordinated review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006), Greenbelt Plan (2005), Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002), and Niagara Escarpment Plan (1985) is now complete. The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017) was released on May 18, 2017, and came into effect on July 1, 2017, replacing the previous Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006). 12 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

PLANNING FRAMEWORK Figure 3. Places to Grow concept map illustrating the areas where growth is being directed, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Ministry of Transportation Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act and provides direction on matters of provincial interest including land use planning, transportation, and development. All decisions affecting land use planning matters shall be consistent with the PPS. The PPS includes policies pertaining to the efficient use and management of land and infrastructure; protection of the natural environment and resources; and employment and residential development. The PPS provides direction to integrate land use and transportation planning through numerous policies. For example, it directs that transportation systems should be provided which are safe, energy efficient, facilitate the movement of people and goods, and are appropriate to address current and projected needs. The PPS sets out policies to protect major goods movement facilities, and transportation and infrastructure corridors for the long term. These policies require planning authorities to plan for and protect major goods movement facilities and transportation and goods movement corridors, and to not permit development in planned corridors that negatively affects the identified use of the corridor. The PPS also directs that settlement areas are to be based on densities and land uses which are transit supportive where transit is planned, exists, or may be developed, and are to support active transportation. It encourages public service facilities to be co-located in community hubs in order to support access by transit and active transportation modes. Provincial plans, such as the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Greenbelt Plan, build upon the policy foundation provided by the PPS. They provide land use planning policies to address issues facing specific geographic areas in Ontario. In order to provide technical guidance on how to achieve the policies of the PPS, the Province has developed sets of transit- and freight-supportive guidelines. The Transit-Supportive Guidelines were published in 2012 by the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) and provide a summary of transit-friendly land use planning, urban design and operational practices. These guidelines are intended to be used by municipalities, transit planners, urban planners, and developers at their discretion in creating environments that will support transit service and increase ridership. The document provides communitywide guidelines, district-level and site-specific guidelines, as well as transit improvement guidelines, and concludes with implementation strategies. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 13

In 2016, MTO released the Freight-Supportive Guidelines as a reference for municipalities, planners, engineers, developers, and other practitioners. The guidelines provide direction for land use planning, site design practices and operational procedures that help create communities and transportation networks capable of supporting the freight industry. They also provide best practices for incorporating freight into land use and transportation plans at all scales, and helping to inform site design, road design, and operational practices. The guidelines do not identify specific network improvements but are relevant to shaping the long-term GGH transportation system. Several upper-tier municipalities have recently developed goods movement strategies to complement their transportation master plans. These strategies examine planning, operational, and regulatory issues, and build on local public- and private-sector partnerships. Climate Change Action Plan The Climate Change Mitigation and Low-Carbon Economy Act passed in 2016, and the 2016 Climate Change Action Plan aims to bring greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 and build a low-carbon economy. Since transportation accounts for about 33% of Ontario s GHG emissions, the implications of an 80% reduction from 1990 levels across the province in overall GHGs will be a critical factor for the GGH transportation system. Achieving the GHG emission reduction goals will require a significant transition away from fossil fuel powered passenger automobiles, not only through technology changes and a transition to low-carbon fuels, but also through intentional integration of land use and mobility planning. > Electric vehicle and charging station, Etobicoke. - The province s Climate Change Action Plan seeks to help support a shift to ultra-low and zero emission vehicles. The CCAP identifies several initiatives to direct investments to help the Province further reduce GHGs and meet the near-term reduction target of 15% below 1990 levels by 2020. Investment estimates in the action plan include up to $764 million for low-carbon fuel and low-emission vehicles, and to support shortline railways; up to $225 million to support cycling and walking infrastructure; up to $675 million to accelerate the electrification of Regional Express Rail; and up to $140 million for research in low-carbon mobility. The action plan also includes commitments to review several policies to enable the shift to more sustainable travel modes over the long term. The Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) and cap and trade program form the backbone of Ontario s strategy to reduce GHG emissions. Transportation related action items in the CCAP include encouraging as many existing drivers as possible to switch to transit, cycling, and walking; developing any new communities alongside transit with transit-supportive densities; helping households shift to ultra-low and zero-emission vehicles; reducing emissions from goods movement; integrating transit planning and land use planning to maximize GHG reductions; and integrating climate change adaptation considerations into infrastructure decision-making. 14 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

PLANNING FRAMEWORK Figure 4. Existing and committed transit infrastructure in the GGH, as per Schedule 5, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Ministry of Transportation TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 15

Moving Ontario Forward Moving Ontario Forward is the Province s plan to build an integrated transportation network across the province. Under Moving Ontario Forward, the Province will invest $31.5 billion over 10 years for transit, transportation and other priority infrastructure projects. The plan will provide about $16 billion in funding for priority rapid transit projects in the GTHA, including: GO Regional Express Rail; An 11km LRT in the City of Hamilton offering service from McMaster University throughout downtown Hamilton to Queenston Traffic Circle; A 20 km LRT along the Hurontario corridor from the Port Credit GO Station in Mississauga to the Brampton Gateway Terminal; and Funding to advance planning and design work for other priority Next Wave projects included in The Big Move. Among the most transformative transit investments made under the Moving Ontario Forward plan is the $13.5 billion capital investment to implement GO Regional Express Rail (RER). GO RER will provide faster and more frequent service with electrification on core segments of the GO rail network, including the UP Express. RER has the potential to transform the way people travel across the region and will provide a major new travel choice to commuters. By moving beyond being a primarily commuter service and by introducing two-way, all day rail service, GO Transit will attract new customers and create the opportunity to increase transit mode shares throughout the GGH. Further, as identified in the 2016 Ontario Budget, the Province intends to implement, subject to agreement with freight rail partners, two-way, all-day rail services on the Kitchener and Milton GO corridors, and an extension of GO rail service to Niagara and Bowmanville. In June 2016, the Province announced that it had secured an Agreement-in-Principle with CN to begin the planning and technical analysis required for infrastructure works that will allow for the delivery of two-way, all-day GO train service along the Kitchener GO corridor. The Agreementin-Principle also begins the planning and technical analysis to build a new freight corridor that will allow CN to shift most of its freight traffic from the section of the Kitchener corridor the company owns roughly between Georgetown and Bramalea to the new corridor. Also in June 2016, the Province committed, subject to final agreement with CP Rail, to extending GO Transit s Lakeshore East rail corridor to offer new GO train service from Oshawa to Bowmanville, with service expected to begin by 2023-24. The Province also announced in June 2016, subject to final agreement with CN Rail, the delivery of new weekday GO rail service between the future Confederation GO Station in Hamilton and Niagara Region starting in 2021, with service to Niagara Falls by 2023. Besides investments in transit, the Moving Ontario Forward Plan includes funding for road repairs, road widenings, and measures to relieve congestion. Examples include repairing strategic municipal roads that connect to the provincial highway network, and a four-lane new alignment on Highway 7 between Kitchener and Guelph. #CycleON: Ontario s Cycling Strategy The Province s cycling strategy, #CycleON, provides a 20-year vision to promote cycling in Ontario. Cycling can deliver a number of benefits including: improved personal and public health, a cleaner environment, and increased tourism and local retail spending. #CycleON envisions that by 2033 cycling will be recognized, respected, and valued as a core mode of transportation. To help achieve this vision, #CycleON identifies areas for action under five Strategic Directions, all of which are relevant to the GGH: Design Healthy, Active and Prosperous Communities Improve Cycling Infrastructure Make Highways and Streets Safer Promote Cycling Awareness and Behavioural Shifts Increase Cycling Tourism Opportunities > #Cycle ON - The province s cycling strategy seeks to promote cycling as a core mode of transportation. 16 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Legislative Framework In addition to the Places to Grow Act, Planning Act, Greenbelt Act, and the Climate Change Mitigation and Low Carbon Economy Act already mentioned above, there are other pieces of provincial legislation as well as federal legislations that govern transportation planning and implementation. Metrolinx Act Under the Metrolinx Act, 2006, Metrolinx is an agency of the Government of Ontario. Metrolinx s mandate is to provide leadership in the co-ordination, planning, financing, development and implementation of an integrated, multi-modal transportation network that conforms with transportation policies of growth plans prepared and approved under the Places to Grow Act, 2005 applicable in the regional transportation area. 9 Environmental Assessment Act The Environmental Assessment Act is the provincial legislation which governs all public infrastructure undertakings that have the potential to affect the environment. It defines a planning and design process that projects should follow in order to take into consideration and mitigate any impacts on the natural, social, cultural, structural and economic environment. The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment was approved in 1987. It allows municipal infrastructure projects, such as transportation, water supply and others, to follow a simplified planning and design process due to their more predictable environmental effects. Depending on the requirements and the impact of projects, there are different schedules that are followed. Public Vehicles Act The Public Vehicles Act (PVA) was established in the late 1920s and requires any company that wants to provide an intercommunity bus service to obtain a licence from the Ontario Highway Transport Board (OHTB). In today s changing market, lack of flexibility to provide new and innovative services, coupled with increasing competition from other modes such as railways and airlines, has resulted in loss of services to many Ontario communities and is posing challenges to the health of the industry. Options are being developed to modernize the regulatory regime governing the intercommunity bus industry to keep pace with the changing needs of the travelling public and ensure that intercommunity buses remain a viable means of transportation. 10 Highway Traffic Act In Ontario, the Highway Traffic Act deals with vehicle licensing and classification, traffic offences, the administration of loads, and other transport-related issues. In particular, the Act regulates driving through driver licensing and vehicle registration. Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (PTHIA) MTO provides comments on all development applications (subdivisions, consents, zoning amendments, etc.) within its permit control authority, under the PTHIA. Generally, MTO s comments relate to highway access, technical issues, and other permit-related matters and conditions. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Ontario has laws and regulations to improve accessibility for people with disabilities. The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) sets out to achieve an accessible Ontario by 2025 by developing, implementing and enforcing accessibility standards in the public and private sectors. The Act sets out a schedule with requirements and deadlines that are phased in and need to be followed by businesses, transit agencies, municipalities, educational institutions, and public sector organizations based on the size of the organization. The Act outlines specific standards for information and communications, employment, transportation, design of public spaces, and customer service. Municipal transit agencies are required to have launched initiatives to make all stations accessible to everyone regardless of their level of mobility (e.g. TTC s Easier Access Program). PLANNING FRAMEWORK 9 Province of Ontario, 2006, Metrolinx Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c.16, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06g16 10 MTO, June 2016, Intercity Bus Modernization: Creating Opportunities and Connecting Ontario Communities, http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/transit/ pdfs/intercommunity-bus-proposal.pdf TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 17

Transportation Players While the Province sets direction for transportation planning at the provincial level, implementation requires coordination across a series of provincial, municipal, and private sector partners and stakeholders. The table below provides a summary of the roles of each of the key transportation players in the GGH and is followed by a more detailed description on their roles, plans, and programs. Table 1. Key Transportation Players in the GGH Players Roles Legislation, Plans/Policies, Guidelines Transport Canada Responsible for railway safety (directly for federally-licensed railways and through agreements for the provincially-licensed shortline railways), as well as VIA. Jurisdiction in relation to air and marine transportation and border crossings. Transport Canada is responsible for developing and administering a long list of Acts and Regulations related to transportation. Among others: Canadian Aviation Regulations Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act Motor Vehicle Safety Act Canada Transportation Act Railway Safety Act Marine Transportation Security Act MTO Provincial transportation planning, regulation, and highway management, oversight of provincially-licensed shortline railways. Highway Traffic Act Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act Shortline Railways Act Provincial Policy Statement Transit-Supportive Guidelines Freight-Supportive Guidelines Highway Access Management Guidelines Metrolinx Improving the coordination and integration of all modes of transportation in the GTHA. The operating agency of regional transit (GO Transit). Metrolinx Act Regional Transportation Plan Municipalities Municipal network planning, including active transportation, roads, and transit. Planning Act Official Plans Transportation Master Plans Municipal Act/City of Toronto Act Municipal Transit Providers Planning and operation of local transit service. Public Vehicles Act Municipal Act City of Toronto Act Railways Intercommunity Bus Operators Port Authorities Provide railway services for both freight and passengers. Providing intercommunity services in the GGH, and bus services between the GGH and the rest of Ontario, Canada, and the U.S. Operating the region s system of ports for both passengers and freight. Canada Transportation Act Canadian Transportation Agency Railway Safety Act Transportation Safety Board Public Vehicles Act Ontario Highway Transport Board Canada Marine Act and Letters Patent Airport Operators Providing air and ground side services at the region s airports for both passenger and goods movement. Aeronautics Act Canadian Transportation Act Pearson Airport Master Plan John C. Munro Hamilton International Airport Master Plan Border Crossing Agencies Ensure safety and security at border crossings. Canada Border Services Agency Act Customs Act Source: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/acts-regulations/acts.htm & https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/acts-regulations/regulations.htm 18 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

MTO In addition to establishing the legislative and policy context for transportation for the province, MTO has a role in transportation planning, regulation, highway management, and funding. Transportation Planning The ministry undertakes long range transportation planning at the provincial and regional levels. These include the development of regional transportation strategies such as the Strategic Transportation Directions in the early 2000 s, and more recently, the Northern Ontario Multimodal Transportation Strategy in 2018. The ministry also carries out mode-specific studies, such as the Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway initiative to support the economy and trade, and the development of the High Occupancy Vehicle network to optimise the use of the existing provincial highways. In recent years, the ministry has carried out planning for a number of specific areas and corridors, including the Simcoe Area Transportation Network Analysis, the Niagara to GTA (NGTA), and the GTA West Transportation Development Strategies. In addition, the ministry has completed the environmental assessment for the Highway 427 Extension and the 407 Transitway projects. These transportation studies and other planning initiatives carried out by MTO inform provincial planning, such as the review and periodic updates of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which was recently updated in 2017. MTO also provides guidance on a range of issues related to mobility and transportation within the province through the development of various guidelines, handbooks, and strategy documents. Examples include the Highway Access Management, Transit-Supportive, and Freight- Supportive guidelines. Regulation Ontario roads and highways are among the safest in North America with a fatality rate of 0.53 per 10,000 d drivers in 2014. MTO works to ensure road safety and mobility through the promotion and regulation of responsible driving behaviour. The key objective is to reduce death and injury on our roads by developing, promoting, and participating in road user safety programs. This includes setting safety standards; developing and evaluating policies, programs and regulations that promote safety for road users, carriers, and vehicles; inspecting, monitoring, and enforcing compliance with commercial vehicle and driver safety standards; and working with a broad range of partners to educate road users about safe driving behaviours, safety, and laws. Highway Construction and Management Programs MTO is responsible for the building and maintenance of the province s highways and highway-related bridges which it manages through the development of maintenance and investment plans. The Southern Highways Program is a five-year investment plan published annually by MTO for building and rehabilitating highways and bridges within western, central and eastern Ontario and is complemented by the Northern Highways Program which covers the northern part of the province. In 2016/2017 the Ontario Government invested more than $2.1 billion in transportation improvements in southern Ontario. MTO also works with municipalities to plan and implement appropriate active transportation facilities where municipal and provincial networks interact (e.g. where bridges pass over 400-series highways). Metrolinx Metrolinx is an agency of the Government of Ontario created to improve the coordination and integration of all modes of transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). The Government of Ontario is making historic investments in transportation through the Moving Ontario Forward plan and other initiatives. Metrolinx has been entrusted to lead the design and delivery of key transit projects funded through the Moving Ontario Forward plan and other initiatives that will help to transform the transportation system for commuters in the GTHA, including GO Regional Express Rail (RER) and other priority rapid transit initiatives. The focus on implementing these projects, and others, further reinforces Metrolinx s critical role in building and expanding the regional transit network, and providing high quality service to meet the needs and expectations of its customers. PLANNING FRAMEWORK TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 19

GO Transit, PRESTO, and UP Express are operating divisions of Metrolinx. The agency is also responsible for the development and implementation of the GTHA s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP guides the work being done to transform the way people and goods move in the GTHA. Metrolinx released its first RTP, titled The Big Move, in 2008. Metrolinx is currently leading a review and update of The Big Move to ensure that the plan continues to address the current needs and opportunities in the region. The review of The Big Move commenced in 2015, and the updated RTP is targeted for completion by the end of 2017. Municipalities Municipalities play a role in the development and maintenance of the transportation system through the planning and implementation of local transportation and transit improvements. Transportation Master Plans Municipal Transportation Master Plans (TMPs) address long-term multimodal visions, road infrastructure, and operations optimization, the movement of goods and people, and challenges to providing transit service, particularly in smaller municipal geographies. Some municipalities have also developed Active Transportation Master Plans which chart out similar alternatives, with a stronger focus on cycling, walking and other nonauto modes of movement. The visions contained in Transportation Master Plans are further enhanced and implemented through their respective Official Plans, which are required to conform with the land use direction set forth in the Growth Plan and to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Municipal Transit Providers Historically, lower tier municipalities maintained and operated their local transit service. Over the years these small agencies have consolidated into larger regional agencies. Today, transit service in the GGH is provided by 25 municipal (lower-tier or upper-tier) transit agencies in addition to GO Transit, the regional transit service for the GTHA, with routes extending to communities across the GGH. These agencies comprise: GO Transit (a division of Metrolinx) UP Express (a division of Metrolinx) Barrie Transit Bradford West Gwillimbury Transit Brampton Transit Brantford Transit Burlington Transit Clearview Transit Collingwood Transit Durham Region Transit Grand River Transit in the Region of Waterloo Official Plans delineate and protect intensification corridors or higher order transit corridors. These protected corridors will receive priority for development and growth because they support the transportation objectives of the municipality, region, and province. > York Region Transportation Master Plan (TMP) - Municipal TMPs establish long-term, multimodal visions for their communities. 20 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Guelph Transit Hamilton Street Railway Lindsay Transit in Kawartha Lakes Midland/Penetanguishene Transit Milton Transit Mississauga Transit Niagara Region Transit Norfolk Transit in Haldimand County Oakville Transit Orangeville Transit Orillia Transit Peterborough Transit Toronto Transit Commission in the City of Toronto Wasaga Beach Transit York Region Transit In addition to agencies offering regular service, there are some municipalities and rural counties that offer para-transit, on-demand, or limited shuttle services, such as Wellington County and the Northumberland Transportation Initiative. Examples of para-transit include Peel Transhelp and Hamilton DARTs. In addition to conventional and para-transit service, new partnerships are emerging to provide on-demand transit service. The Town of Innisfil in Simcoe County has partnered with Uber to provide residents with safe, affordable, and reliable transit. The transit agencies have varying fares and levels of service. Today local transit agencies in the GTHA, with the exception of the TTC, have agreements that allow riders a free transfer to connecting local agencies in the region. PRESTO, a smart card fare system, offers a common and modern method of payment throughout the region. For connecting transit services in the GTHA, GO Transit provides a fare discount to the local transit fare when connecting to or from GO Transit services. This discount on transfers will extend to the TTC, starting in early January 2018. This accommodation recognizes the linkages that exist within the GTHA and the need for more affordable cross-regional travel. Since 2014, Metrolinx has been working with GTHA municipalities, transit agencies, and MTO to develop a regional fare integration strategy, in an effort to improve customer/rider experience and increase integration across multiple service providers in the GTHA. > PRESTO card and reader - With the roll out of the PRESTO smart card fare system there is now a common method of payment throughout the region. Railway Companies As noted, the GGH rail network is largely owned and maintained by the two Class I transcontinental freight railway companies, CN and CP. However, within the GGH some of the right-of-way of the rail corridors is shared among freight, commuter passenger, and intercity passenger operations. Both CN and CP maintain threeyear rail network plans. These plans indicate which lines each company proposes to continue to operate and which will be discontinued in the following years. In the GGH, VIA Rail operates primarily on CN freight rail lines, and passenger trains in Canada do not enjoy operational priority over freight trains. As the number of freight trains, commuter trains, and VIA Rail trains continues to climb, it is becoming increasingly difficult for VIA Rail passenger trains to provide reliable on-time service. This affects the company s ability to keep existing riders or attract new ones from alternative modes of travel such as flying, driving, or intercommunity bus. 11 VIA Rail has proposed a high frequency rail (HFR) project to build dedicated tracks within the Quebec to Windsor corridor. 12 As noted, seven shortlines serve the GGH, and GO Transit also owns sections of certain key regional rail corridors. Intercommunity Bus Companies There are numerous companies that provide intercommunity services in the GGH, and also connect the GGH with the rest of Ontario, Canada, and the U.S. The biggest companies include Coach Canada and Greyhound Canada, both providing domestic and international services, but with the latter also providing a commuter service in southern Ontario, known as PLANNING FRAMEWORK 11 http://www.viarail.ca/en/about-via-rail/governance-and-reports/dedicated-tracks 12 Ibid. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 21

QuickLink. Ontario Northland Transportation Commission is an agency of the Government of Ontario and provides freight and passenger services in Northern Ontario with bus connections to Southern Ontario. Port Authorities Canada s port authorities operate federally owned ports. They are established under the Canada Marine Act, as government business enterprises that are financially self-sufficient, receiving no federal, provincial or municipal funding (with the exception of some smaller ports that are operated by the provincial government). Port Authorities operate in accordance with the Canada Marine Act and Letters Patent issued by the federal Minister of Transport. An established port authority is responsible for operating each of the ports, and various private companies maintain terminals, warehouses and cargo handling facilities within each port. The three Canada Port Authorities listed below operate in the GGH. PortsToronto, formerly known as the Toronto Port Authority, is responsible for the management of the Harbour of Toronto and the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. Billy Bishop Airport operates under a Tripartite Agreement signed by the federal government, the City of Toronto, and PortsToronto. It uses its Airport Master Plan, updated approximately every five years, as guidance for its future planning. PortsToronto seeks to maintain its current role as a centrally-located marine gateway for bringing in bulk commodities, such as cement, road salt, and sugar and flour, to serve the urban GGH. The Hamilton Port Authority (HPA), which operates the largest port in Ontario, has expanded to several new properties in the past 15 years and is developing into a modern industrial employment community. HPA is currently undertaking a review and update of its Land Use Plan, a document that outlines the Port Authority s land use vision for a 10 to 20-year time frame in order to grow its activities. The Oshawa Port Authority is currently undertaking a few expansion projects, including the completion of a rail spur to directly connect the port to the rail network and respond to the growing demands of the port s clients. Airport Operators Pearson International Airport is owned by Transport Canada and is operated by the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA). GTAA s focus is to continue enhancing Pearson s status as a major international gateway for people and goods. As part of this, GTAA developed an Airport Master Plan in 2008 which outlines the vision for the airport by 2030. Among other issues, it addresses future growth, ground access, and parking for the airport. The Pearson Master Plan has estimated the capacity of the airfield at Pearson will be reached by 2023. Billy Bishop Airport is owned and operated by PortsToronto under a tripartite agreement, as noted above. The Region of Waterloo airport as well as the Oshawa Executive Airport are owned and operated by the Region of Waterloo and the City of Oshawa respectively. Hamilton International Airport (HIA) is owned by the City of Hamilton and is operated under contract by Tradeport International Corporation. Border Crossing Agencies The Canada Border Service Agency (CBSA), which is a federal agency created in 2003, facilitates and oversees international trade across Canada s borders. CBSA s priorities include securing the border strategically, streamlining and simplifying the border experience, advancing global border management, and strengthening organizational resilience. 13 The Bi-national Transportation Strategy for the Niagara Frontier is a joint undertaking of the Department of Transportation in New York State (NYSDOT) and MTO, and is a plan that was developed to address existing and future transportation needs (to a 2035 horizon) at the border and the surrounding corridors. The Niagara Frontier, with its four border crossings, is a major economic gateway for Canada-U.S. trade, and a top attraction for tourism. A key recommendation of the Strategy was to establish a Transportation Coordination Group, which will develop sensible solutions to improve traffic flow across the border while maintaining security. 14 13 Canada Border Services Agency 2016-2017 Report on Plans and Priorities 14 Bi-National Transportation Strategy for Niagara Frontier, December 2005 22 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

4.0 Existing Conditions & Trends This section describes the existing patterns in how people and goods are moving across the GGH and the trends in those patterns over time. Moving People While the Greater Golden Horseshoe has a very diverse transportation system the majority of trips made by people are by automobile (81%) using the region s road and highway network. Most of the remaining trips are made by transit (11% including GO Rail services) and by active modes of transportation such as walking and cycling (6%). The final 2% of trips are made by other modes such as taxi or school bus services. 1% GO Rail 6% Active (Walk and Cycle) 2% Other Auto Private auto mode share has remained consistently around 80% since the 1990s Nearly 14 million trips were made within the GGH each weekday in 2011, primarily in private autos with an average of 1.2 persons per car. A total of 25.4 billion passenger vehicle kilometres were traveled in the region in 2010. 15 While the number of automobile trips increased by nearly 40% between 1996 and 2011, the majority of this increase can be attributed to growth in population. Across the GGH, the number of automobile trips increased by 2% annually on average between 1996 and 2011. The rate of change in automobile trips varies depending on location, ranging between a 10% decrease and 7% increase for the 10-year period (between 1996 and 2011). Figure 5. GGH transportation mode share for all trips on an average weekday CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 10% Local Transit 81% Auto Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey, 2011 15 2010 Ontario Traffic Volume Information System TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 23

Figure 6. Total trips on an average weekday in the GGH by mode, 1986-2011 15,000,000 13,500,000 12,000,000 10,500,000 Daily Trip 9,000,000 7,500,000 6,000,000 4,500,000 3,000,000 1,500,000 0 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 Auto 6,312,389 7,939,649 10,600,761 11,517,897 13,428,965 14,442,651 Transit (local) 1,300,961 1,272,132 1,328,295 1,336,841 1,535,657 1,807,149 Transit (GO rail) 62,074 107,043 92,843 132,396 157,791 228,950 Walk and Cycle 782,876 681,226 832,232 839,288 978,991 1,003,381 Taxi 38,854 41,545 55,606 63,395 71,142 66,467 Other 263,786 189,495 275,751 310,797 369,194 375,729 While the GGH has a very diverse transportation system, the majority of trips made by people are by automobile. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey *1986 and 1991 TTS covered the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) **2001 TTS did not include Waterloo Region *** TTS only includes walk and cycle trips if they were for work or school purposes, or were part of a complex tour with motorized modes (auto or transit) **** Other includes school bus, motorcycle, other (private buses, shuttles etc.), and unknown modes Toronto s downtown core has the lowest automobile mode share in the region with just 35% of all trips being made by car (see Figure 31 in the Appendix). 16 The rest of the City of Toronto has the second lowest rates of automobile mode share, ranging from 55% in the southwest part of the city, to 81% in Etobicoke. The City of Hamilton shows a similar pattern, with 80% of all trips being made by car, while the rest of the Hamilton area (Dundas, Stoney Creek, Ancaster, Flamborough, and Glanbrook) has a higher automobile share, with 90% to 95% in 2011. Automobile mode share in the municipalities nearest to the City of Toronto ranges from 85% to 89%. Vaughan, at 89%, has the highest auto mode share of the cities bordering Toronto. 17 Elsewhere in the GGH, both Waterloo and Kitchener have lower automobile mode shares than other municipalities nearby, at 86% and 88% respectively. All other municipalities in the region range from 89% to 100% automobile mode share, 18 as the car is in many cases the only practical option for more sparsely populated rural communities. See Figure 31 in the appendix for 2011 mode share by region or city. 16 Transportation Tomorrow Survey, 2011 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 24 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Increase in car ownership has been greatest in GGH municipalities outside of the GTHA. Between 1996 and 2011, the GGH witnessed a 5% increase in the percentage of households that own two or more vehicles 19 (see Figure 33 in the appendix showing change in two-car ownership by municipality). Changes in two-car ownership in GTHA municipalities were relatively small, with the largest increase occurring in Durham Region where the percentage of households owning two or more vehicles grew by 4% over the 15-year period to 2011. Elsewhere in the GGH, the trend of increasing car ownership has been more significant, with the cities of Guelph, Peterborough, and Barrie experiencing jumps in the proportion of households that own 2+ vehicles by 10%, 8%, and 7%, respectively. Overall, outside Toronto and to some extent Hamilton, zero-car households are rare, even in regions such as York and Peel that have experienced significant urban growth. High rates of car-free households are really only found in downtown Toronto with its unique combination of multiple rapid transit lines and very high density. Even there, however, the rate of zero-car ownership decreased between 1996 and 2011. 20 Since 2001 there has been a slight decrease in the percent of young people with licences. Amongst persons aged 16 to 25, an overall decrease of 3% in the rate of driver s licence possession was observed across the GGH between 1986 and 2011. 21 The decrease is more pronounced in Toronto s downtown, which experienced an 11% drop, and the cities of Peterborough and Barrie, which experienced 10% and 8% reductions respectively. A slightly lower but still substantial decrease in the possession of driver s licences was observed in the Region of Waterloo (5%). The other municipalities in the GGH observed small decreases, between 1% and 3%. Simcoe County (excluding the City of Barrie) is the only part of the GGH where an increase in youth acquiring driver s licences was noted. In contrast to behaviour displayed by young adults, those over the age of 25 showed an increasing tendency to possess driver s licences, likely reflecting the fact that more seniors have licences and are keeping them longer. See Figure 39 in the appendix for the trends from 1986-2011 in driver s licence possession for adults under 25 by municipality. 19 Transportation Tomorrow Survey 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. Transit There has been an increase in overall local transit ridership numbers since 2001. Nearly all local transit agencies in the GGH saw an increase in their passenger trips (Figures 7 and 8) between the mid-1990s and 2015. In Peel Region, Mississauga Transit experienced the most significant growth with the number of transit passenger trips increasing from approximately 20 million annual trips in 1992 to more than 37 million in 2015. The City of Toronto remains the single largest transit service provider in the GGH, and one of the largest in North America, with 537 million annual trips in 2015. On a daily basis, the number of TTC passengers that board on subway and local buses increased significantly between 1996 and 2011, reaching more than 2.7 million boardings per day. In addition to conventional services offered, most transit agencies provide para-transit door-to-door services for people with physical disabilities. Para-transit services use accessible buses or minivans, and typically require customers to request the services in advance. TTC serves over three million door-to-door para-transit trips within the City of Toronto every year. > TTC Subway, Toronto - nearly all local transit agencies have seen an increase in transit trips since the 1990s. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 25

Figure 7. Annual transit trips in select municipalities in the GGH (where data is available), over 3,000,000 trips per year (See Figure 8 for additional municipalities) 70,000,000 Annual Number of Regular Service Passenger Trips 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 GO Transit Mississauga Transit Hamilton Street Railway York Region Transit Grand River Transit (Waterloo) Brampton Transit Durham Region Transit Niagara Region Transit Guelph Transit Peterborough Transit 0 1992 1993 1995 1996 2000 2001 2006 2011 2015 Year GO Transit and Mississauga Transit have seen some of the largest increases in transit ridership. Source: Canadian Urban Transit Association Figure 8. Annual transit trips in select municipalities in the GGH (where data is available), under 3,000,000 trips per year (See Figure 7 for additional municipalities) 3,500,000 Annual Number of Regular Service Passenger Trips 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 Oakville Transit Barrie Transit Burlington Transit Brantford Transit Milton Transit Lindsay Transit (Kawartha Lakes) Orangeville Transit 0 1992 1993 1995 1996 2000 2001 2006 2011 2015 Year Despite a recent decline in trips, there has been overall modest growth in ridership since 2000 amongst the region s smaller transit providers. Source: Canadian Urban Transit Association. 26 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 9. Total TTC boardings on an average weekday, 1996 to 2011, TTS Daily Boarding 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 Total TTC TTC Subway TTC Bus TTC Streetcar Growth in TTC ridership between 2001 and 2011 has been greatest for bus and subway services. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 0 1996 2001 2006 2011 TTC Subway 1,013,221 1,158,029 1,341,201 Year TTC Streetcar 194,311 204,483 223,503 TTC Bus 991,923 975,413 1,012,370 1,164,397 Total TTC 1,877,441 2,182,945 2,374,882 2,729,101 Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey While the number of transit trips has increased, transit mode share has declined slightly. According to the Transportation Tomorrow Survey, the number of transit trips in the GGH has grown by 40% since 1986, reaching over 2 million trips per day in 2011. However, transit s overall mode share has declined. While transit mode share (including GO Rail) represents 12% of all daily GGH trips, the modal split varies greatly across the region. Figure 10 illustrates the difference in transit share for each municipality between 1996 and 2011. Transit share in most parts of the GGH remained virtually unchanged, wavering between a 1% decrease and 1% increase over this time frame. In some municipalities, including Waterloo, parts of the City of Toronto including the downtown central business district, North York, Scarborough, and the Town of Milton, transit share increased more definitively, by 2-4%, from 1996 to 2011. All municipalities in Peel Region, and most of the municipalities in the south end of York Region, experienced a 1-2% increase in transit. Finally, Guelph, Peterborough, Hamilton, and areas outside Toronto s downtown experienced a decrease in transit share of 2 to 4%. Part of the transit share increase in Milton, Peel, York and Durham can be explained by the introduction of additional GO Rail and Bus services to and from those areas. Also, transit projects that may have resulted in an increased transit share in the south end of York Region and Peel are the Viva Rapidways and the Mississauga Transitway respectively. Transit mode share remains highest in the City of Toronto, Hamilton, and inner ring municipalities. The City of Toronto had the greatest transit mode share, at just over 23% in 2011. This ranges from a high of 48% in the downtown to a low of 14% in the suburbs. 22 Generally, areas along the city s subway corridors and within the older streetcar neighbourhoods exhibit the highest levels of transit mode share. Outside of Toronto, the greatest level of transit mode share based on trip origin is in central Hamilton (10%), and the ring of municipalities stretching from Oakville to Oshawa. Transit mode share in these cities ranges from 5% in Whitby to a high of 8% in Mississauga. 22 Transportation Tomorrow Survey TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 27

Figure 10. Difference in transit mode share for all trips on an average weekday between 1996 and 2011 Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey 28 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 11. GO Transit ridership 2006-2015 (See also Figure 32, GO Transit annual ridership) GO Transit Ridership 80,000,000 70,000,000 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 Total GO GO Rail GO Bus Between 2006 to 2015, GO Rail and GO Bus ridership increased by 41% and 57% respectively. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 20,000,000 10,000,000 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Source: GO Transit Annual Ridership Report Substantial growth in GO Rail and GO Bus use has been supported by significant service increases. Over the last decade, from 2006 to 2015, GO Rail and GO Bus ridership increased by 41% and 57% respectively. GO Transit has gradually made substantial improvements to bus and train service and those improvements are reflected in the continuous growth of its annual ridership. For example, in 2000, all weekday off-peak service was extended to Burlington and Oshawa along the Lakeshore West rail line, and new daily trips were added on Milton, Stouffville, and Richmond Hill lines. New bus services were introduced: Along Highway 2 (express service); Between Milton-Finch and Milton-Union; and On Highway 407. In 2006, all-weekend train service extended to Oshawa along the Lakeshore East line. The following year, all off-peak service was extended to Aldershot, and the same year, the Barrie South station opened and added another stop along the Bradford line (today Barrie line). In 2008, the Stouffville line extended to Lincolnville and bus service was introduced to the University of Guelph. In 2009, all week bus service to Niagara and new services to Peterborough and Kitchener-Waterloo contributed to the expansion of the GO bus network. The following year, 2010, marked the greatest annual increase of GO Rail ridership, supported by service additions along the Barrie and Lakeshore West lines, and the extension of the Georgetown line to Kitchener. Finally, a similar increase in GO Rail ridership was noted in 2013, supported by the introduction of all-day 30-minute service along the Lakeshore East and West lines. In 2015, midday rail service to Brampton was introduced, peak service to Hamilton began, and the West Harbour GO Station opened. The more recent service improvement was the opening of Gormley Station on the Richmond Hill line in 2016. In the future, continuous service improvements and new GO stations will enhance the GO system as the Regional Express Rail program rolls out. Intercommunity bus travel remains relatively low. Intercommunity bus travel is an important travel option for leisure trips and tourism. In 2013, intercommunity bus and rail accounted for 3% and 2% respectively of Canadian residents trips into Ontario. 23 23 Pocket Guide to Transportation 2013, Ministry of Transportation TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 29

Figure 12. Active mode share (walk, cycle) for all trips internal to regional municipalities on an average weekday Active Mode Share of Trips Internal to UGCs 10.5 9 7.5 6 4.5 3 1.5 0 Peterborough County Kawartha Lakes Niagara Region Waterloo Region York Region Halton Region Simcoe Durham Region City of Peterborough Peel Region Wellington County City of Barrie City of Guelph City of Orillia Hamilton Region City of Toronto 2011 Active trips within each GGH region are between 2% and 10% of daily mode share. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey, 2011 Note: TTS only includes walk and cycle trips if they were for work or school purposes, or were part of a complex tour with motorized modes (auto or transit). Active Transportation Active mode share is highest in Urban Growth Centres. Only 6% of all trips in the GGH are made by walking and cycling. 24 This mode share varies greatly across the region depending upon the characteristics of different places. Within the designated Urban Growth Centres (UGCs), which tend to be the densest and most urban areas in the region, a substantial proportion of all internal trips are made by active modes. In 2011, Downtown Toronto (41%), the Eglinton-Yonge Centre (38%), and the City of Peterborough (36%) had the highest rates of active transportation trips internal to the UGC. These are followed closely by the Downtown Hamilton Area (33%), Downtown Guelph (33%) and the North York Centre (31%). It should be noted that many of the UGCs are not developed yet but are rather designated areas of growth where high density and a mix of uses will support multimodal transportation nodes, and as such some have minimal travel (e.g. Vaughan Metropolitan Centre). The majority of the remaining UGCs have active mode share between 6% and 28%. Outside of the UGCs, where densities tend to be lower, uses more segregated and pedestrian and cycling infrastructure not as established, the share of active transportation drops significantly. As shown in Figures 40 and 41 in the appendix, active trips within the region vary between 2% and 10% of daily mode share depending upon municipality. 25 In 2011, the City of Toronto had the highest active mode share at 10%, and was followed by the City of Guelph, the City of Orillia, and Hamilton with 7%. The largest and most rural regions and counties had the lowest active transportation rates in 2011 (Peterborough County (2%), Kawartha Lakes (3%), and Niagara Region (4%)). It should be noted that a lot of the walking and cycling infrastructure outside the urban areas, such as the trail network, is aimed largely at recreational users who may not be captured by the weekday survey period of the Transportation Tomorrow Survey. 24 Transportation Tomorrow Survey, 2011 25 Data for GGH regions includes any UGCs within the region. Active mode would be even lower if UGCs were excluded. 30 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 13. Annual passenger traffic for Ontario* and for Pearson Airport** 60,000,000 50,000,000 Ontario Total Pearson Total Annual Passenger Traffic 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 Pearson Domestic Pearson Transborder Pearson International CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 10,000,000 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Pearson Airport s annual air passenger traffic reached 41 million in 2015. Source: *Air passenger traffic and flights, Statistics Canada and **Pearson Airport Annual Reports from 2003 to 2015 Air Pearson Airport is a growing national and international hub for passenger travel. Pearson International Airport is the GGH s (and Canada s) dominant domestic, transborder, and international travel hub, accounting for nearly 30% of air passenger traffic in Canada and more than 80% of air passenger traffic in Ontario in 2015. Air passenger movements have almost quadrupled over the past 40 years, going from 10.5 million in 1974 to 21 million in 1994 26 and reaching 41 million in 2015. 27 Pearson International Airport benefits from a strategic location in the heart of the GGH and an even larger region that extends across the U.S. border. There are 12.5 million potential customers within a 3-hour drive catchment area that, besides the GGH, includes London, Kingston, Buffalo and Rochester. Furthermore, the market area for international hub airports is often measured by the population within a 90-minute or two hour flight time, which for Pearson airport is 150-200 million potential customers. 28 Pearson has used its strategic location to successfully expand its international reach and profile, increasing its percentage of international passengers from 48 percent in 1985 to 60 percent in 2014. 29 It is now the second busiest international airport in North America. The region s smaller airports provide shorter haul domestic and international passenger service. Billy Bishop Airport has seen significant growth in passenger activity over the last decade, moving 2.3 million passengers in 2012, compared to 1.5 million in 2010. There was minimal scheduled traffic before 2006, the year when Porter Airlines opened its hub at the airport. Hamilton International Airport (HIA) also provides passenger travel to domestic and international destinations and carried 312,839 passengers in 2015, but has been experiencing a year-over-year passenger decline. The Region of Waterloo International Airport has a much more limited amount of service focused on medium haul business travel and leisure, yet for four years in a row, passenger traffic increased, reaching 153,963 in 2015. This corresponds to a 5.8% increase compared to the previous year. 30 26 Toronto Pearson: Growth, Connectivity, Capacity, September 2015 27 Pearson Connects: A Multi-Modal Platform for Prosperity, February 2016 28 Toronto Pearson: Growth, Connectivity, Capacity, September 2015 29 Ibid. 30 www.waterlooairport.ca/en/resources/accessible-pdfs-2016/ykf-2016-master-plan-public-information-centre-boards---may-25_2016.access.pdf TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 31

Rail Intercity passenger rail ridership has fluctuated, but remains close to 2000 levels. Unlike the steep ridership increase that GTHA local and commuter transit services have seen in the past 20 years, intercity passenger rail has remained essentially unchanged at 3.8 million annual passengers since 2000. The only exception to this trend was observed around 2008 when VIA s ridership increased to over 4.6 million riders, most likely due to the hike in gas prices which caused rail to become a more compelling and competitive alternative to driving. After 2009, VIA ridership has been steadily decreasing to reach the ridership levels of 2000. See Figure 38 in the appendix for annual VIA Rail ridership numbers from 2000 to 2015. Border Crossings The Peace Bridge is the most significant of the GGH s four border crossings. The Peace Bridge in Fort Erie is the busiest border crossing in the GGH and the third busiest crossing for trade in Canada overall. In 2016, the Peace Bridge carried nearly 4.1 million passenger vehicles and 1.2 million trucks, connecting the U.S. with the QEW highway. 31 The Queenston-Lewiston Bridge, which connects with Highway 405, carried nearly 2.5 million passenger vehicles and over 750,000 commercial vehicles in 2016, while the Rainbow Bridge and Highway 420 carried 2.5 million passenger vehicles. Whirlpool Rapids is reserved for NEXUS members, which allows pre-approved travelers to cross the border quickly and therefore the annual number of border crossings remains comparatively low. Figure 14 illustrates the historical declining trend of passenger vehicles at all four border crossings. In 2006, the four border crossings together observed more than 31 Public Border Operators Association (PBOA) Figure 14. Number of passenger vehicles crossings, 2006-2016 6,000,000 5,000,000 Peace Bridge Annual Passenger Vehicle Crossings 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 Rainbow Bridge Lewiston-Queenston Bridge Whirlpool Rapids Bridge 1,000,000 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year 2016 The number of passenger vehicles at the region s border crossings has been in steady decline. Source: Public Border Operators Association (PBOA) 32 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

12.1 million passenger vehicles travelling to and from the U.S. In 2016, the transborder passenger vehicle volume was reduced to approximately 9 million. This decline in transborder road travel is a result of multiple factors including the introduction of low-cost air travel options, which encouraged air travel between Canada and the U.S. at the expense of road travel, and the variation in exchange rates. In addition to passenger vehicles, approximately 50,000 passenger buses, Recreational Vehicles (RVs) and other miscellaneous passenger vehicles crossed the GGH border in 2016. passenger and freight services. Comparable data is not readily available for crossings into Canada. The Whirlpool Rapids Bridge in Niagara Falls has a single track on its top deck used exclusively by the Toronto New York City Maple Leaf train. The Maple Leaf, jointly operated by Amtrak and Via Rail, provides once daily service in both directions. As shown in Figure 16, rail passenger traffic from Ontario to New York has declined from a peak of 53,603 crossings in 2000 to 20,756 in 2016. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Railway bridge crossings between the GGH and the U.S. have been declining. There are two trans-border railway bridges that carry rail passengers and freight between the GGH and the U.S. Historical data demonstrates a downward trend in U.S.- bound rail traffic using these crossings, for both Figure 15. Annual USA-bound train crossings at GGH rail border crossings from 1995-2016 4000 3500 3000 2500 Total Trains 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year There has been a steady decline in rail border crossings since the late 1990s. Source: United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Border Crossing / Entry Data TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 33

Figure 16. Annual USA-bound train passenger counts at GGH rail border crossings from 1995-2016 60,000 50,000 Annual Train Passenger Crossings into USA 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Rail passenger traffic from Ontario to New York has declined from a peak of 53,603 crossings in 2000 to 20,756 in 2016. Year Source: United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Border Crossing / Entry Data Moving Goods The GGH and Ontario economies are dependent upon the multimodal freight transportation system for the movement of goods to, from and through the region. Trucks transfer the majority of goods moved in and out of the GGH both in terms of value and in terms of tonnage, but a significant portion of goods follows a multimodal journey that can also include air, rail and marine. Almost all goods are moved at least once via the road system on a truck. 32 Trucks have historically carried approximately 55% to 60% of the total value of imports and exports between Canada and the U.S., and over 70% between Ontario and the U.S. Over the years this share has remained for the most part unchanged with some minor fluctuations. Truck share dropped from 58% in 2007 to 54% in 2014, but picked up again reaching 60% in 2016. Goods moved by vessel have been picking up to reach a 6% share in 2014, but dropped again to 3% in 2016. In 2016, imports and exports by truck between the U.S. and Canada were valued at over $327 billion, surpassing rail which accounted for just over $88 billion, air with $26 billion and marine which transported nearly $18 billion worth of goods. Over 56% of all goods crossing into Canada from the U.S. are destined to Ontario, contributing more than $300 billion to the Ontario economy in 2016. 33 Figures 17 and 18 show historical value of imports and exports by mode between Canada and the U.S. and between Ontario and the U.S. respectively. 32 Commercial Vehicle Survey 33 Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2007 to 2016 34 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 17. Modal share between Ontario and the US by value of imports and exports (in millions of US$) Total Imports Exports between Ontario and US (Millions of US $ 350,000 With the exception of a decline in 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year * Other Vessel Air Rail Truck 2009/2010, modal share of goods carried between the US and Ontario has remained relatively consistent with trucks accounting for over 70% of goods shipped by value. * Other includes pipelines, mail and electricity. CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2007 to 2016 Figure 18. Modal share between Canada and the US by value of imports and exports (in millions of US$) Total Imports Exports between Canada and the US (Millions of US $) 700,000 The recession in 2009 resulted in a 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 Other Vessel Air Rail Truck significant drop in both truck and rail traffic. 100,000 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year * Other includes pipelines, mail and electricity. Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2007 to 2016 Truck Traffic While truck traffic has increased, its proportion of all traffic on GGH highways has remained relatively consistent over time. As a proportion of all traffic flows, the percentage of trucks on major provincial GGH highways has remained relatively constant over time, at around 9-10%. 34 However, while the proportion of truck traffic has remained relatively consistent, the absolute numbers increased between 1988 and 2010. In general, truck traffic on the provincial expressway system has increased upwards (in absolute volumes), outwards (from Toronto into the suburban regions) and spread out between the peaks across the day, so that many locations on the provincial expressway system are now operating at or near an all-day peak. There was a 22% increase in the number of empty trucks on the road between 2001 and 2006, leading to around 40% of trucks reported as being empty, though this may merely reflect a reluctance to share information with surveyors. In 2012, Ontario s Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS) observed more than 89,000 daily truck trips with origin or destination in the GGH and carrying more than $1.5 billion worth of commodities. More than 48,000 (or 55%) of these trips started or ended in Peel Region. In addition, another 18,000 truck trips were made through the region carrying $643 million worth of commodities per day. The trip activity decreased by 9% between 2006 and 2012 and the value of goods carried increased by about 1%. Note that the CVS is conducted mainly on provincial highways, and so it tends to capture long-distance or inter-regional heavy truck trips. As a result, these figures do not fully capture the overall flow of trucks through and within the GGH. 34 Ministry of Transportation Ontario. 1988-2010 traffic counts based on AADTs. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 35

Truck traffic is affected by the extent of connections to other goods movement modes including rail, air and marine. Furthermore, major goods movement infrastructure facilities such as airports and intermodal terminals tend to become anchors for employment areas and logistics centres that support the goods movement industry, which have an impact on truck traffic as they become more and more developed. The highest rate of growth for truck flows over the last 20 years was along the north-south highways and in particular Highways 410 and 427. This reflects such factors as the proximity of these highways to Pearson International Airport, the high levels of industrial and logistics activity in these areas, and the proximity of the CN Brampton and CP Vaughan intermodal rail terminals. In addition, truck traffic is affected by the employment areas and hubs of industrial and logistics activity that develop around these anchors of goods movement infrastructure. The largest percentage of truck commodity flows is destined to the U.S. Between 30% and 40% of truck commodity flows from the GGH are destined to the U.S., according to the 2012 CVS, with another 25-30% destined to eastern Canadian locations and the rest destined to the western Ontario peninsula or western Canada. The volume of trips inbound to the GGH is about the same as the volume of trips outbound from the GGH. The exception is for trips to Western Canada where nearly twice as many trips are destined to Western Canada than return. Between 2006 and 2012, a period which spans the Great Recession, the value of weekly imports by truck from the rest of Ontario to the GGH increased by 7%. Imports from the rest of Canada and the U.S. increased by 15%. Over the same period of time, the value of exports to the U.S. decreased. The vast majority of GGH truck trade is transported across the Niagara and Windsor/Sarnia border crossings. Based on MTO s 2012 Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS), a comprehensive survey of trucks that use the provincial highway system, 72,300 commercial vehicles travelled between the GGH and the U.S. each week. It is estimated that 99.3% of this GGH trade is transported across the Niagara and Windsor/Sarnia border crossings. The Windsor and Sarnia crossings handle a 54% share (38,812 commercial vehicles per week), while the Niagara crossings handle a 46% share (32,900 commercial vehicles per week) of the GGH U.S. trade. Figure 21 illustrates the historical trend of annual truck traffic at border crossings between 2006 and 2016. Truck traffic at all border crossings observed a decrease around 2008/2009, likely due to the economic recession, but has never since recovered and remains at stable levels. In total the two border crossings for commercial vehicles in the GGH carried approximately 2 million trucks in 2016. 36 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 19. Weekly truck freight exports and imports from/to the GGH (billions of $) Billions of $ 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rest of Ontario 2006 Rest of Canada 2012 USA Overall Billions of $ 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rest of Ontario 2006 Rest of Canada 2012 USA Overall CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Weekly Truck Freight: Imports Weekly Truck Freight: Exports While the value of truck imports has increased since 2006 the value of truck exports has remained relatively the same. Source: Ontario Commercial Vehicle Survey Legend (Example) $ 73 Daily Cargo Value ($ in millions) 4,800 Average Weekday Daily Number of Trucks Figure 20. The value of goods on GGH highways (weekday traffic volume). Source: Commercial Vehicle Survey, 2012; MTO Traffic Volumes TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 37

Figure 21. Annual truck crossings at GGH-US border crossings open to commercial traffic between 2006 and 2016 4,000,000 3,500,000 Lewiston-Queenston Bridge Peace Bridge 3,000,000 Detroit-Windsor Tunnel Annual Truck Crossings 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 Ambassador Bridge Blue Water Bridge 1,000,000 500,000 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year 2016 Though relatively stable since 2010, the number of truck crossings has never fully recovered from the 2008/2009 recession. Source: Public Border Operators Association Air While Pearson International Airport remains the largest freight handler, Hamilton International has increased its volume significantly over the last decade. In 2015, Pearson Airport moved nearly 368,000 tonnes of freight, accounting for over 31% of total Canadian shipments by tonnage. Hamilton International Airport (HIA) has grown substantially in freight operations from 66,000 tonnes in 2006 to 110,000 tonnes in 2015. HIA is a leader in express overnight service, an important advantage given the trend towards online shopping and same/next day delivery. To strengthen its role in this important goods movement sector, HIA recently opened a cargo facility that provides small businesses with direct ( end of runway ) access to overnight air courier services, and the nearby designated employment areas are intended to build on this base and proximity. HIA has emerged as a major air cargo gateway for two reasons: it suffers from less landside congestion than Pearson, and it is also able to operate 24 hours a day, whereas Pearson s proximity to residential areas means it has some overnight restrictions (when courier traffic is high). Given its downtown location, Billy Bishop Airport is strategically located to become a courier/express delivery hub, but its ability to do so is tied to the type of aircraft that can use the facility. A Tripartite Agreement, signed in 1983 between the City of Toronto and the former Toronto Harbour Commissioners (which was later replaced by the Toronto Port Authority), governs the operation and aircraft types that are permitted and prohibited at Billy Bishop. The agreement prevents the expansion of infrastructure at the airport, including runway extensions, prohibits commercial aircrafts from landing or taking off between 11:00 pm and 6:45 am, and dictates the type of aircraft permitted. Rail Rail carries almost 20% of goods traded between the U.S. and Canada. While the road network carries the bulk of freight moved in Ontario and the GGH, rail carries 18% of goods by value traded between the U.S. and Canada. 35 In 2013, Ontario exported approximately 11.5 million tonnes of goods by rail, up from just over 11.2 million tonnes in 2012. Ontario imported 7.1 million tonnes in 2013, which increased from just over 7 million tonnes in 2012. 35 Pocket Guide to Transportation 2013, Ministry of Transportation 38 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 22. Annual cargo volumes at Pearson, Hamilton, and total in Ontario 500,000 Annual Cargo Value in Tonnes 400,000 300,000 200,000 HIA Cargo Pearson Cargo Ontario CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 100,000 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year HIA Cargo 81,850 85,349 81,331 86,542 88,984 110,797 Pearson Cargo 340,410 344,305 345,732 346,352 356,794 367,993 Ontario 446,088 449,304 443,158 452,621 463,512 497,073 While Pearson is the largest freight handler, the volume at HIA has grown substantially over the last decade. Source: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/olc-cel/olc.action?objid=51-203-x&objtype=2&lang=en&limit=0 Intermodal (container) traffic is growing across North America. A key component of this traffic is containers that ship to North American marine ports from international (i.e., overseas) sources. 54% of the international transoceanic container traffic destined for the GGH arrives in Eastern Canadian ports (Montréal and Halifax), with the rest arriving through Western Canadian ports (mainly Vancouver). Specific data on changes in container traffic over time are not available for the GGH s intermodal terminals. However, a 2016 study for the Port of Vancouver provides an indirect indication: the forecast notes that container traffic has tracked closely to national GDP growth in recent years and that Ontario s GDP growth and that of Canada as a whole are similar. 36 The International Railway Bridge, part of the CNR Stamford Subdivision, connects Fort Erie, Ontario and Buffalo, New York. The bridge is used by both Canadian National and Canadian Pacific freight trains. As shown in Figure 23, the total number of rail containers entering the U.S. from the GGH has declined from a peak of 181,462 in 2000 to 90,596 in 2016, with a notable dip following the financial crisis in 2008. The GGH s intermodal terminals are major container gateways. The CN Brampton Intermodal Terminal handles about 1 million containers each year. 37 International container traffic makes up 69% of inbound container traffic to the Terminal, and 43% of outbound container traffic from the Terminal. It is also a major gateway between the GGH and the rest of North America. 36 The derivation is taken from information found in Container Traffic Forecast Study Port of Vancouver, 2016, prepared by Ocean Shipping Consultants for the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority in December 2015 37 Milton Logistics Hub Environmental Impact Statement, Canadian National Railway Company, 2015, http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/document-eng.cfm?document=104074. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 39

Figure 23. Annual U.S.-bound rail container counts at GGH rail border crossings from 1997*-2016 200,000 Total Empty Rail Containers 150,000 Loaded Rail Containers Number of Rail Containers 100,000 50,000 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year The total number of rail containers entering the U.S. from the GGH has declined from a peak of 181,462 in 2000 to 90,596 in 2016. * Data was not available for 1995 and 1996 Source: United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Border Crossing / Entry Data The CP Vaughan Intermodal Terminal has been expanded to handle some 700,000 containers every year. The Vaughan Terminal handles a similar proportion of international goods to the Brampton Terminal, with international containers making up 60% of inbound traffic, and 40% of outbound movement. Milton s existing terminal, the CP Milton Expressway Terminal, offers a different sort of service than intermodal, providing overnight shipment of non-reinforced truck trailers between Toronto and Montréal. Although it competes with traditional trucking, the service is not capable of providing the same speed for goods movement. 38 In addition, several transload terminals exist in the GGH. A transload terminal is a location at which bulk goods, such as liquids, chemicals, sand, and minerals, can be transferred between trucks and trains. 39 Some are operated by CN and CP, while others are operated by private firms. 40 Ports The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway connects the GGH to ports around the world. The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway is used for the transport of steel, coal for power generation, limestone for construction and the steel industry, grain, cement, sand, and stone aggregates for agriculture. Iron ore is the largest single commodity transported in the system (by volume) and it is mostly used to produce steel within the region. Steel coming from overseas originates from Europe and Brazil. Figure 24 shows the annual number of inbound and outbound shipments of cargo at each of the major ports in the GGH. 38 Regional Transportation Plan Legislative Review Backgrounder: Urban Goods Movement, Metrolinx, July 2016. 39 Freight Glossary Index, FHWA, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/fpd/glossary/#index. 40 A full list of transload facilities served or owned by CP can be found at http://www.cpr.ca/en/choose-rail/transload-trucking. CN operates two CargoFlo transload facilities in the GGH one in Hamilton and the other in Concord (https://www.cn.ca/en/our-business/supply-chain-solutions/cargoflo). 40 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 24. Annual inbound and outbound cargo shipment by GGH port, 2016 Annual Number of Shipments, 2016 700 600 500 400 300 200 Inbound Outbound CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 100 0 Hamilton Toronto Clarkson Oakville Bowmanville Oshawa Thorold Port Colborne GGH Port Hamilton is the largest port in terms of number of shipments by a large margin. Source: http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/seaway/facts/traffic/index.html. Data based on top 25 Canadian ports for inbound and outbound shipments. Note that the Port of Nanticoke is not included in this figure. Figure 25. Total traffic through the St. Lawrence Seaway (millions of metric tonnes) Tonnes (millions) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1960 1962 Traffic on the St. Lawrence Seaway has been in steady decline since a peak in the late 70 s. 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Source: http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/seaway/facts/traffic/index.html. Data based on top 25 Canadian ports for inbound and outbound shipments. Note that the Port of Nanticoke is not included in this figure. 2016 TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 41

Figure 26. Annual cargo tonnes by port, 2016 Annual Cargo Tonnes Inbound and Outbound, 2016 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 Steel Slabs General Cargo Containers Grains Coal Bulk 1,000,000 0 IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT Hamilton Toronto Clarkson Oakville Bowmanville Oshawa Thorold Port Colborne GGH Ports The GGH ports are almost entirely focused on domestic and cross-border shipment of bulk commodities. Source: http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/seaway/facts/traffic/index.html. Data based on top 25 Canadian ports for inbound and outbound shipments. Note that the Port of Nanticoke is not included in this figure. Tonnage figures are limited to cargo volumes moved through the Seaway lock structures. Overall, cargo shipments on the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway System exceed 160 million tonnes of cargo every year, and generate $34.6 billion of economic activity and 227,000 jobs in Canada and the U.S. 41 However, the trend in Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Seaway System traffic is downward, as seen in Figure 25, which shows the annual tonnage moving through the St. Lawrence Seaway (see also Figures 36 and 37 in the appendix for a historical breakdown of cargo shipment volumes by port). This indicates that the Seaway is underutilized and, in contrast to capacity constraints in other freight modes, has excess capacity. Factors such as high costs of pilotage and port terminal handling, and cabotage regulations that restrict completion, contribute to this decline, and initiatives to reduce costs and increase competition are moving slowly. 42 The GGH s ports focus primarily on shipment of bulk commodities. The GGH s ports are almost entirely focused on domestic and cross border shipment of bulk commodities and do not generally handle containers, given that ocean ports such as Vancouver, Montréal, and Halifax offer far more cost- and time-competitive capabilities for handling containers, which are mostly inbound from Asia and Europe. Therefore, this type of cargo destined for the GGH area is almost exclusively transported on truck or rail. By far the most important port in terms of tonnage handled is the Port of Hamilton. It handles more than 10 million tons of cargo and 650 vessels per year. Although steel historically dominated the Port s activities, today, grains, corn syrup, and other agricultural commodities and food products are predominant. The Port of Toronto is primarily an inbound port, bringing in raw sugar for refining, road salt, and cement and steel for construction. In 2013, the Port of Toronto moved 1.65 million tons of cargo. The Port of Oshawa handles potash, steel, and salt. The smaller ports have more specific focuses. For example, Oakville is focused on the movement of refined petroleum products. The ports in Bowmanville and Clarkson both predominantly handle cement, although Clarkson also specializes in the movement of lubricants. Port Colborne primarily handles grains, gravel, sand, coke, and gypsum. See Figure 26 for inbound and outbound volumes of cargo at each port. 41 http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/seaway/facts/eco_impact.html 42 Source: Multimodal Transportation Strategy for the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region, Report 2: Trends, Issues and Opportunities, prepared for the Council of the Great Lakes Region, March 2017. 42 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

5.0 Influencing Factors This section takes a closer look at some of the influencing factors that have been shaping trends in people and goods movement in the GGH. Changing Landscape of Employment Employment is a large driver of demand for the region s transportation system through travel to work and trips taken for work. This relationship is demonstrated by the significant levels of peak period congestion experienced across the region each day as residents travel from their homes to places of employment. There are different types of employment throughout the region which require different transportation services from major office areas with high densities of employees to low density employment lands which serve land-intensive industries. Not surprisingly, changes in the region s employment patterns over the last 30 years have had a significant impact on the region s commuting patterns. There has been a decrease in the overall share of trips to downtown Toronto and an increase in the share of trips to the rest of the GGH. The overall number of commuting trips by all modes that arrive in downtown Toronto each day increased from 351,674 in 1996 to more than 451,000 trips in 2011 - a 28% increase. 43 These commuters are served by a strong and growing regional rapid transit system which was set up to facilitate commuting downtown, including the subway system within Toronto, and GO Transit outside of the city. At the same time, the number of commuting trips destined to the GGH outside the City of Toronto grew from 1.3 million in 1996 to nearly 2 million in 2011 - a 43% increase. 44 As a percentage of all commuting trips, those that end in downtown Toronto remained approximately the same, while those destined for the rest of the GGH increased by over 5%. 45 These findings indicate that during this period, the majority of commuting trips occurred outside of the City of Toronto, and the greatest amount of growth is being seen in these trips. This type of commuting is not well served by the existing transit system, densities are generally lower, and levels of transit service are much lower when compared to the system serving downtown. Large employment areas ringing Toronto account for a significant number of daily trips. One of the significant influences in commuting patterns is the continued growth and maturation of employment clusters along the region s highway corridors. The Neptis Foundation s Planning for Prosperity report (2015) suggests that the three largest employment clusters ringing Toronto - the area around Pearson Airport in Mississauga and Toronto, the area around Highway 400 in Toronto and Vaughan stretching east to Keele Street, and the area centred on the 404/407 highway interchange encompassing parts of Markham, Toronto, and Richmond Hill (see Figure 27) - account for approximately 500,000 trips in peak hour. One of these clusters, the Airport Employment Area, is estimated to have 277,000 jobs with a $35 billion overall economic impact. This means that the airport employment area is now the second largest cluster INFLUENCING FACTORS 43 Transportation Tomorrow Survey, 1996 and 2011 44 Ibid. > Beaver Creek, Richmond Hill - Large employment areas ringing the city account for approximately 500,000 trips in the peak hour. 45 The final category of trips, those destined to Toronto outside the downtown, decreased as a percentage of all trips by about 5%, making up the difference. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 43

Tor-York West Employment Area Tor-York East Employment Area Airport Employment Area Downtown Toronto Significant Employment Zone Suburban Knowledge Intensive District Figure 27. Large employment areas in the GGH (Refer to The Neptis Foundation s report for discussion about Suburban Knowledge Intensive Districts) Source: The Neptis Foundation, 2015. of employment in the country after downtown Toronto. The area is predominantly low density and (despite the recent advent of the Mississauga Transitway, which serves the airport corporate centre to the south, and the UP Express, which serves only the passenger terminal) underserved by transit, so a majority of trips to and through the area are by automobile. Increasing Levels of Congestion A key influence and critical issue facing the region s transportation system relates to the increased levels of congestion experienced on the region s roads and highway corridors. Figure 28 demonstrates how highway congestion in the PM peak period is focused within the City of Toronto and the surrounding municipalities. Major corridors are particularly congested, including the 400 series highways in and surrounding Toronto, and the QEW from Toronto to Hamilton. In addition, many arterial roads within the GTHA, Niagara Region, and the cities of Barrie, Waterloo, Kitchener, Guelph, Brant, and Peterborough are very congested in the PM peak period (see Figure 42 in the appendix). High levels of congestion have environmental and social impacts and are costing the region billions in lost time. In the 2008 report Costs of Congestion prepared for Metrolinx, it was estimated that the annual cost of congestion to commuters in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area was $3.3 billion. This cost accounted for the impact of travel delays, environmental impacts, vehicle costs from travel delays, and increased chance of collisions. There was a further $2.7 billion identified in 44 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

lost opportunities for economic expansion. The report estimates the cost of congestion to the GTHA under a business as usual model will be $15 billion annually in 2031 - $7.8 billion in terms of travel delay and costs, and $7.2 billion in reduced economic output and job loss. 46 High levels of congestion are having a disproportionate impact on the movement of goods. Congestion is a top concern for carriers and shippers. It affects their ability to move goods quickly and reliably around the GGH. Goods movement vehicles absorb a disproportionate share of the burden of congestion, owing to relatively high values of goods transported. Contemporary regional and intraregional freight movements have relied disproportionately on highway infrastructure relative to other modes. However, as automobile use has grown, road congestion has become increasingly problematic for the movement of goods. The issue is exacerbated in the GGH context where areas with the highest levels of goods movement are those that also experience some of the greatest levels of commuting traffic related to suburban employment areas. Peel Region, for example, which accounts for about 25% of all truck activities on Ontario, 47 and the 401 corridor which has some of the greatest values of goods movement (see Figure 20 above), are experiencing some of the highest congestion levels and lowest travel speeds (see Figure 28.) INFLUENCING FACTORS 46 2008 Metrolinx Report, Costs of Road Congestion in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area 47 Peel Strategic Goods Movement Plan 2012 to 2016 Level of Annual Total Truck Delay in Hours by Census Subdivision PM Peak (3-4pm) Truck Travel Speeds (km/hr) Figure 28. Annual hours of commercial truck activity lost due to congestion by municipality and traffic congestion across GGH highway, SAFO, and MTO Source: ATRI GPS Data 2015 & Land Information Ontario TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 45

Maturation of the Region The continued growth and development of the region has had a significant influence on the needs and development of the transportation system, influencing mode share and creating new patterns of movement. While traditional centres demonstrate some of the highest levels of self-containment, as inner-ring municipalities have developed, their level of containment has increased. Self-containment refers to people both living and working within the same municipality. Communities with a higher level of self-containment generally have shorter average trip distances and greater potential to shift mode share. Figure 29 shows the different levels of self-containment across the GGH in 2011. 48 The City of Toronto has the highest level of self-containment at 81%. The City of Brantford, City of Peterborough, City of Guelph, Fort Erie, and Kawartha Lakes have self-containment rates in the 75-80% range. The City of Hamilton, St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Cambridge, and Barrie have slightly lower self-containment rates of 70-74%. In some cases, such as for Peterborough, Barrie, and Kawartha Lakes, selfcontainment is likely a product of relative isolation from other parts of the GGH, especially Toronto, or the size of the region itself. As they continue to mature, inner-ring municipalities are evolving into more mixed-use environments with clusters of retail and employment uses, and a greater mix of housing and higher ranges of density. The impact on the levels of self-containment varies among the inner-ring communities. The area demonstrating the greatest increase in selfcontainment over the last three decades is Vaughan, with a 21% rate increase between 1986 and 2011. This self-containment rate can primarily be explained by the transformation of Vaughan from a rural and then primarily 48 Based on the 2011 TTS, showing only work commuting trips Levels of Self Containment Figure 29. Levels of self-containment of various GGH municipalities in 2011 Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey 46 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 30. Active transportation infrastructure growth in Toronto, 2001-2016 Year Bike Lane (km) Cycle Tracks (km) Multi-use Pathway (km) Total (km) % Increase from 2001 2001 64-159 223-2006 68-182 250 12% 2010 113-195 308 38% 2016 117 11 336 464 108% Active transportation infrastructure expanded significantly between 2001 and 2016. Source: City of Toronto Open Data residential area to a significant employment destination. During that time, trips under 5 km in Vaughan increased by over 7%. A similar albeit less pronounced trend is demonstrated in Markham with a rate that grew from 42% in 1991 to 52% in 2011. However, these communities have not yet had success in changing mode share for shorter trips to active transportation and transit as discussed in Section 4.1.2. and indicated in Figure 12. Denser urban environments with a more compact built form that result in more complete communities are generally more conducive to greater transit and active mode share. There is a strong relationship between density, urban form, and mix of uses across the GGH and mode share. The clearest example of this is in downtown Toronto, but the relationship between built form and mode share is also apparent in the region s more urban municipalities of Kitchener, Waterloo, Hamilton, Mississauga, Brampton, Richmond Hill, Markham, Pickering. Ajax, Whitby, and Oshawa. The variation between these municipalities and others in the GGH is a reflection of the way transit and active mode share can be greatly influenced by factors such as density, infrastructure and services, competitiveness with other modes (e.g. cost and travel time in congested cores), and sense of safety. While longer trips may be candidates for rail or other forms of rapid transit, nearly half of trips in the GGH (47%) are actually less than 5 kilometres in length, 49 a distance that is very conducive to local transit and more active forms of mobility. There is increasing interest in growing active mode share through new policies and investment. Municipalities are increasingly interested in active transportation investment as a means to facilitate a mode shift for shorter trips, including last mile trips to and from transit hubs. In addition to the benefit of reducing congestion, this kind of modal shift could also help with the promotion of healthier lifestyles and contribute to an overall reduction in transportation-related GHG emissions. Some municipalities in the GGH, including the City of Toronto, City of Guelph, City of Hamilton, and the Region of Waterloo, have recently started to adopt complete streets policies while investing in new pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. INFLUENCING FACTORS > Downtown Mississauga - Inner Ring suburbs are evolving into more mixed-use, higher density environments. The stability of active transportation mode share in Toronto (see Figure 12) is likely related to the continued increase in residential development within the downtown core. As a result, more people live closer to jobs, so there are more opportunities to walk or bike. The recent substantial increase in supporting infrastructure in Toronto, especially after 2006, also supported growth in active transportation. The total length of Toronto bike lanes, cycle tracks, and multi-use pathways increased by 108% between 2001 and 2016, as shown in Figure 30. 49 2011 TTS, 2011. This refers to straight-line distance between trip origin and destination (i.e. as the crow flies ) and not true trip distance. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 47

Shifting Trends in Goods Movement As discussed above, the efficient movement of goods is of critical importance to the GGH s prosperity and is a key transportation issue. In addition to the growing levels of congestion and changing patterns of employment, a number of trends impact the shipment of goods. There is decreasing labour force availability. The goods movement industry is setting high expectations of particular skill sets, and is hindered by decreasing labour force availability and limited education and awareness. The goods movement industry and its activities are a huge economic driver for the GGH, and in certain areas, account for a high share of jobs (e.g. 43% of jobs in Peel region are goods movement-related, which generate $29 billion in labour income). 50 As the industry s needs continue to grow, there will be a need for public education campaigns and appropriate investments in education and apprenticeship to ensure that a sustainable labour force is available to support the industry. > Parcel pick-up locker, Toronto - Self-service pick up locations allow users to access their goods at their convenience, eliminating the need for door-to-door delivery. E-commerce is changing how people and businesses access goods. E-commerce (online shopping) is growing quickly for both business-to-consumer and business-to-business transactions. E-commerce reinforces the general trend in logistics towards smaller consignments, single orders, and higher delivery frequency. However, e-commerce is also changing rapidly, as retail practices, consumer purchasing habits, and the economy continue to evolve, and therefore e-commerce has the potential to both reduce and/or increase trip-making. Increased demands for want it now deliveries mean that fulfillment centres must be located closer to customers, which may result in more such centres being located in the GGH. On the other hand, self-serve pick-up points are becoming more popular, allowing shoppers to retrieve their (online) purchases at their convenience. Express delivery is growing quickly and impacting truck traffic. > Canada Post van, Mississauga - E-commerce is creating increased demand for express delivery services. Businesses of all types and sizes are increasingly relying on quick pick-up and direct delivery for their day-to-day operations. Industry sources and casual observation suggest that there is a growth in urban truck traffic, particularly for light and medium-sized trucks as a result of e-commerce and express deliveries. However, there is no sufficient data to quantify and forecast this trend. 50 Peel Region Goods Movement Strategic Plan, 2017-2021 48 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

On-demand goods movement and other load management technologies may impact deliveries. Some logistics providers have started to offer Uberlike services, in which customers can request an ondemand pick-up for smaller packages and parcels from independent drivers. Other companies offer load-matching services, in which drivers returning to their home city after making a delivery can pick up a load for the return trip: there are examples of major retail distributors sharing each other s services to avoid empty backhauls (i.e., the two firms are moving goods in opposite directions and otherwise would make the return trip with empty vehicles). Alternate fuels and other technologies are working to reduce the climate change impact of trucks. Electric delivery vans have been deployed by couriers and other delivery fleets in urban areas. Many fleets also have introduced natural gas (compressed and liquefied) vehicles into their fleets, with some Canadian municipalities, for example, already using natural gaspowered waste pick-up vehicles. Other fleets have started to use green diesel and bio-diesel fuels for their existing diesel-powered vehicles. Several technologies, driver behaviour, and operations and maintenance practices have been deployed in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from truck fleets. The technologies include the use of lighter body and chassis materials, drag reduction shields, low rolling resistance tires, and anti-idling controls that use waste engine heat to power auxiliary heaters and refrigerators. Many trucking firms also monitor driver behaviour, in order to use fuel more efficiently. Many fleets have improved load optimization by reducing empty space, and have kept vehicles well-maintained to ensure they operate efficiently. Changing Technologies and Service Models As discussed above, the efficient movement of goods is of critical importance to the GGH s prosperity and is a key transportation issue. In addition to the growing levels of congestion and changing patterns of employment, a number of trends impact the shipment of goods. > Hybrid electric delivery van, Toronto - In an effort to reduce the climate change impact of trucks, fleets are shifting to the use of alternative fuels and other technologies. The rise of emerging mobility services is providing new ways for people to travel. Emerging mobility services can be understood as falling within two distinct groups individual-based mobility and group-based mobility. Individual-based mobility is centered on the automobile and a private transportation experience, while group-based mobility includes shared services making use of a number of modes, including automobiles, mini-buses, and full-size buses. There are a number of individual-based mobility options that have emerged within the GGH. These include the growth of both fleet and peer-to-peer car sharing services, bike share, and ride-sourcing services. Car sharing fleet operator: Fleet car sharing models are typically owned and operated by a single organization. This model is a variation on the traditional rental car business model; instead of a centralized rental location, vehicles are located throughout the city, accessible via an automated unlocking system and accessed using a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) card or smartphone. There are a number of car sharing services operating in cities throughout the GGH such as Enterprise CarShare, Zipcar and car2go. Car sharing peer-to-peer platforms: Peer-to-peer car sharing is the process by which individual car owners are able to rent their vehicles to members for a predetermined time period and price. In 2016, Turo, a San Francisco based company expanded into the GGH. Bike sharing: Bike sharing services enable users to access and rent bicycles for short trips within a designated service area. These services, such as Bike Share Toronto or SoBi in Hamilton, rely on a series INFLUENCING FACTORS TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 49

of fixed stations located across the service area for users to rent and return the bicycles. Users are able to retrieve a bicycle from one location and drop it off at any other available location in the network within a limited timeframe. Hamilton SoBi also allows users to lock a bike outside of a designated station/hub (e.g. to a pole or regular bike rack) within the service area for a convenience fee. Ride-sourcing: Ride-sourcing is a category of services which allow, customers to access private transportation services, including taxis, via a computer or mobile device. Vehicles are typically equipped with GPS, allowing for automated ride matching and deployment. This model can be thought of as an evolution of the traditional taxi dispatch service. Uber is an example of a ride-sourcing company operating in the Toronto area. There are a number of group-based mobility services, some of which operate within the GGH. These include shared ride-sourcing services (e.g. UberPool), on-demand private shuttles, and private buses and van pools. Shared ride-sourcing: Shared ride-sourcing services allow riders traveling in the same direction to share a vehicle and thus reduce cost. This represents a technologically advanced equivalent of Havana s taxi collectivos, where instead of shouting one s destination at a passing shared taxi, ride matching is done using algorithms hosted on the company s server and a price is calculated automatically. UberPool, a shared ridesourcing service in the suite of Uber offerings, recently launched in the Toronto area. On-demand private shuttles: On-demand private shuttles provide a flexible routing and scheduling service marketed as cheaper than taxi service, which in some cases can be more affordable and frequent than traditional transit (in particular in remote, lower density areas). Currently, many transit agencies in the GGH use on-demand services for their para-transit programs, either by using the agencies transit vehicles or partnering with taxi companies, but there are an increasing number of examples of cities and agencies in the GGH that are expanding the application of ondemand service to replace unviable transit routes or complement regular transit service. In 2016, Milton Transit and Metrolinx invested $125,000 each for an on-demand transit service project. Milton and Metrolinx collaborated with a local taxi company using RideCO, an app developed in Waterloo, which allowed GO Transit customers to share Models of Service Delivery The established model of transportation in the GGH was one that relied on private vehicle ownership, complemented by more service-based mobility options. Private vehicle ownership has been the preferred transportation mode choice in the postwar era. While its dominance was perhaps first related to enhanced mobility and a perception of freedom, changes in the geography of the region, including extensive housing dispersion, lower density development, and emergence of autooriented retail and employment areas, have helped to further entrench its position as the dominant mode of choice. Service-based mobility refers to modes which can be broadly characterized as those which operate as a publicly-available service regardless of ownership or operational structure. Fixed-route public transportation providers (such as YRT/Viva, GO, TTC, and HSR), and taxis are two such modes which together capture the majority of non-auto trips in the region. Taxis and public transit agencies in Ontario operate within a regulated framework that produces a quasi-monopoly, enforced by municipal bylaws and provincial legislation. These regulations have developed over a long period of time and reflect a number of public policy goals including: passenger and driver safety, equity and social responsibility, and, in the case of the taxi industry, income security through the control of licensing. > Bike share service, Hamilton - Bike sharing services facilitate the use of active transportation for short trips within urban areas. 50 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

INFLUENCING FACTORS > car2go car sharing service, Toronto - The fleet car sharing model allows users to rent cars from a single organization in various locations throughout a city. taxi rides to and from Milton GO Station. Overall, the one-year pilot project was deemed successful, and demonstrated that such services can shift auto drivers to other modes of travel. The most recent example comes from the Town of Innisfil, which in March 2017 recommended to their council the implementation of a pilot on-demand responsive transit service using Uber s ride-sourcing platform (UberPool). The ride-sourcing service will be available for Innisfil, residents to/from key destinations within Innisfil where they can connect to other modes and services for a fee between $3 and $5. The Town would provide funding to subsidize the difference between the Uber ride and the traditional bus transit fare. Private buses and vanpools: Private buses are typically operated by a private company for a fee, or offered at no cost to employees. There are a number of examples of private bus and van pools that operate within the GGH. One of the most notable is the Aerocentre shuttle which operates out of Mississauga s Airport Corporate Centre. It provides direct service to Toronto s Kipling subway station during rush hour, as well as lunch time services between the Aerocentre and area eateries. New mobility models are transforming how the transportation sector functions. The advent of new mobility models is resulting in a fundamental shift in how the transportation sector functions. The private sector is taking on an increasing role in a realm that is currently dominated by government. Alternative transit services, whether publicly or privately delivered, are filling gaps where conventional services are not meeting customer needs. 51 As has been seen with the taxi industry in some GGH municipalities, emerging mobility models can have disruptive impacts on the transportation industry. The field of data management has also gained prominence as a result of new mobility models, as they tend to generate a high volume of data which can be used to understand and more efficiently manage patterns of movement. 52 51 New Mobility Background Paper, Metrolinx, July 2016 52 Ibid. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 51

6.0 Future Outlooks and Considerations for the Transportation Network This section looks forward to identify some important considerations for the development of a GGH transportation plan. It includes consideration of what the emerging technologies described in the previous section mean for the GGH, and of the emerging challenges that will need to be addressed. A Changing Economy The rise of the sharing economy and e-commerce means that a comprehensive and integrated transportation plan for the region will need to identify ways in which the GGH s transportation system can respond to changes, and continue to contribute to the region s prosperity. The following are some of the key considerations in achieving this. Increasing emphasis on the efficient movement of goods The efficient movement of goods to, from, and through the GGH is essential to the region s prosperity. While the GGH has always depended on the movement of goods to support its manufacturers and meet the needs of its residents, the shift to e-commerce and express delivery service is placing increased emphasis and strain on its goods movement system. Some of the region s most important trucking routes are also its most congested highways, and this problem continues to worsen as more and more people work and live along these corridors. It is worth noting that many recent GGH transportation master plans and Official Plans have introduced language that recognizes the role of goods movement in achieving transportation, land use, and economic development aspirations. Recent initiatives include: complete streets guidelines that work to minimize the truck-bicycle conflict through the inclusion of appropriate truck loading spaces; the consideration of SmartFreight planning, and references such as MTO s Freight-Supportive Guidelines to improve the treatment of goods movement in site, corridor, secondary, and master plans; strategic goods movement networks, which allow authorities to program and prioritize needed infrastructure improvements that can support truck traffic; and new forecasting tools that better account for future truck demand. 52 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Changing patterns of manufacturing and industry Over the past several decades, many manufacturing and industrial processes relocated from North America to overseas locations, primarily in order to take advantage of lower labour costs. More recently, some of these processes have relocated back or closer to their North American origins, as labour costs in some countries, notably in China, have started to rise. Other factors, such as increased automation, the desire to consolidate operations, and changing fuel and transportation costs, have also influenced the move to near-shoring and reshoring. Mexico is one beneficiary, because it already has the industrial and transportation infrastructure, and lowcost labour force in place, and is close to the American and Canadian markets. On the other hand, some types of manufacturing are candidates for relocation to (or home-grown expansion in) Canada. This is manufacturing that requires high skills, high productivity, and is automated. This type of manufacturing has the potential to change distribution patterns especially if such high-technology, highvalue goods are intended for export from the GGH. For example, some manufacturers have located within Hamilton International Airport s industrial zone, in order to take advantage of the airport s around-the-clock express delivery of goods. The proximity of the airport means that the transport time of products to international and trans- continental destinations is minimized, and shipping reliability is increased. Although there has been some consideration of repatriating some of these jobs to Canada, this has limited potential due to the differences in labour costs. As a result, there may be some shift in the distribution patterns of manufactured and processed goods entering the GGH. However, it is unlikely that there will be large shifts in the modes (i.e., between rail and truck). Moreover, there is some evidence that the same factors impacting Chinese manufacturing are generating a westward shift to lower-cost countries elsewhere in Asia (such as Vietnam and India) and, eventually, even in Africa. This means that goods destined for the GGH are still likely to move by water to a Canadian port, then by rail and truck to the GGH, much as they do today. > Hamilton International Airport (HIA), Hamilton - The third largest airport in Canada for goods movement. The growth of automation and high tech manufacturing In addition to increasing automation of high-technology manufactured goods, the introduction of 3D printing allows the customization of products in a cost-effective manner. There is some indication that third-party logistics providers 53 could be well positioned to offer 3D printing services, by using the technology to add a customized component to a basic product before making the final delivery to the customer in other words, final assembly of a consumer product takes place just before the final delivery, and individually for each good. This in turn could change the function of assembly and distribution centres. As well, some retailers are experimenting with the use of drones to make deliveries. However, the costs associated with this mode, the regulatory environment, and other operational factors, are still being determined. New pressures on the region s gateways for goods movement Ports, airports, intermodal terminals, and land border crossings are the gateways into and out of the GGH for both people and goods. Supporting the function of these gateways is critical to our regional economy. While these gateways have been very important to our region s success, the growth of the region is creating new challenges for how these areas operate, and that in turn is having an impact on their ability to support the region s economy. The success of employment areas around these goods movement gateways is resulting in increased FUTURE OUTLOOKS 53 Also known as 3PLs, these are transport companies that also organize their clients logistical operations. Many large courier companies offer 3PL services. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 53

congestion that is impacting the movement of goods going to and from them by truck. Redevelopment of the region s waterfronts as new places for people to live and work is likewise constraining operations of some of the region s ports. Changing patterns of goods movement and increasing numbers of passengers are creating operational challenges for goods being transported by air. The GGH s airports are a vital economic asset that both generate and facilitate growth. There is a need to develop a comprehensive airport and ground transportation strategy that can help to articulate and support Pearson s growing role, and ensure growth of the region s airports is coordinated so that they complement each other s operations and support greater regional prosperity. The growing role of Toronto Pearson International Airport Toronto Pearson has experienced tremendous growth over the last four decades, emerging as the second fastest growing airport in North America. In North America, Toronto Pearson provides the second largest gateway to international destinations. From serving 44 million passengers in 2016, the GTAA s conservative estimate of growth over the next two decades puts the airport at roughly 80 million passengers per year by the mid-2030s. Regional air travel volume in Southern Ontario is expected to reach 90 million passengers or more, well beyond current air travel capacity, even taking into account already planned capacity investments at Toronto Pearson. > Pearson International Airport, Toronto - Toronto Pearson plays a major role in generating and facilitating growth in the GGH, while serving as a hub for the movement of goods and people. 54 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

A Growing Region As municipalities surrounding Toronto have grown and developed, patterns of travel within the GGH have changed. Meeting the needs of projected growth, and integrating transportation planning with land use, will be one of the considerations for the GGH Transportation Plan. Growing travel within and between innerring municipalities FUTURE OUTLOOKS The level of containment within communities has increased, and more trips are being made both within and between inner-ring municipalities. While this shift has been supported by the region s network of highways and arterial roads, the ability to service this changing demand through transit will need to be a priority in ongoing planning and decision making. Planning for transportation within the GGH will need to support better access to jobs and services and respond to the region s increasingly dispersed employment geography. For example, improved high capacity transit to select suburban employment areas has the potential to help relieve traffic and support goods movement. The Suburban Knowledge Intensive Districts identified by the Neptis Foundation, and shown on Figure 27, as well as other focal points within the three large employment areas ringing the City of Toronto, are potential areas that could benefit from such an approach. Improved transit would also facilitate a shift in these areas to higher value employment districts capable of supporting a greater mix of uses and more active modes of transportation. 54 Increased integration between transportation and land use Transportation has played a role in influencing where growth has taken place in the GGH and this role will be key to the GGH Transportation Plan. For example, in places where more significant transit-oriented development is required through provincial land use planning direction, there may be a need to lead with transit infrastructure to support that type of development. This could include strategic locations in existing suburban employment areas that can support more knowledge intensive jobs, and act as gateways for more dispersed transit networks. Aligning the transportation system with population > Suburban employment area, Markham - Improved transit to Suburban Knowledge Intensive Districts is required. and employment forecasts and growth requires both addressing existing gaps and proactively supporting desired nodes. Not all new growth and development is the same, and there will be a need for transportation planning to employ different strategies to respond to all the differing contexts of growth within the GGH. These include high density, mixed-use centres, lower density suburban areas (residential and employment), exurban areas, rural areas, areas that are already well-served and may need little intervention, and transportation voids that require significant intervention. The need for a more optimized transportation system Optimizing the existing transportation system will also be critical to serving the region s future needs and meeting its sustainability goals. Optimizing the existing system means increasing the efficiency in how it is used and where strategic investments are made. Use of tools such as managed lanes, where the users of a lane are restricted, or road pricing (examples include transit-only lanes, High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes or High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes) prioritize more space-efficient travel. The introduction of complete street designs can help to ensure that roads accommodate all modes of travel. 54 Planning for Prosperity, Neptis Foundation, 2015. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 55

Better use of the railway network The rapid growth being experienced in the GGH is placing increased pressure and demand on the region s rail corridors for both freight and passenger uses. This pressure is expected to continue into the future as we plan for our transportation system to accommodate growth in the region. A regional, system-wide approach is required to examine the future demand in freight and passenger movements, to identify gaps and issues as related to rail infrastructure, operations, policy, or regulations that are of regional significance. Furthermore, the development and assessment of regional, system-wide options will ensure that the railway system can be optimized to accommodate future demands in freight and passenger movements. A system-wide approach entails a broad examination of all major railway corridors in the GGH and their interface with the rest of the transportation system (e.g. intermodal facilities, roads and transit services). This approach requires close collaboration among railway owners, operators, regulators, and service providers including the federal government, the Province, Metrolinx, VIA Canada, freight rail companies, and short-line railways. Increasing Pressure on Sustainability and Health The transportation sector contributes 35% of Ontario s emissions and will play an important role in meeting Ontario s climate change targets. There is also an increasing recognition of the linkage between transportation and health. Efficient movement is no longer the only consideration in planning the transportation system: sustainability and health must also be primary drivers. Greater emphasis on more sustainable transportation Addressing the issue of climate change is a global priority, one that will require the contribution of all levels of government, people, and industry. In an effort to reduce Canada s greenhouse gas emissions and meet the country s obligations under the Paris Agreement, the federal government recently proposed a national carbon floor price that will be set at $10/tonne in 2018 and rise to $50/tonne in 2022. This floor price is required unless actions on the provincial level exceed this price. Ontario s Climate Change Action Plan sets a goal of becoming a North American leader in low-carbon and zero emission transportation. Through a phased approach, the Plan seeks to reduce GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. It identifies a series of actions aimed at reducing the amount of GHG emissions from cars and trucks today, including supporting more electric and zero emission vehicles, making it easier to walk and cycle and improving transit infrastructure. While reducing the environmental impacts of vehicles will play an important role, a shift to a more sustainable transportation system will also require supportive land uses, particularly higher densities and a greater mix of uses that result in complete communities which allow for increased reliance on transit and active transportation. The success of sustainable transportation options depends on having a built environment where alternatives to the car are viable ways for people to get to work and conduct their daily activities. > Left turn bike lanes, Markham - The prevalence of sustainable active transportation relies upon a conducive built environment. 56 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

The growth of healthy transportation options A shift to active modes of transportation will also help facilitate a more sustainable transportation system. Over 50% of trips in the GGH are under five kilometres in length, and with recent increases in density, and a continued emphasis on intensification and the development of complete communities, there is potential to increase this percentage. Short trips are prime candidates for a shift to active transportation, and the example of Downtown Toronto demonstrates that where housing, jobs, and other destinations such as retail areas are located in proximity to each other, and there is investment in infrastructure for active transportation, impressive gains in active transportation mode share can be made. Active transportation can and should form a significant component of the region s transportation mix, including first and last mile connections to transit. The health and environmental benefits of walking and cycling are significant. Supporting more active forms of transportation will be an important strategy towards promoting greater levels of physical activity, reducing chronic illness resulting from inactivity, and improving mobility for people of all ages. As more pedestrians and cyclists share the road with larger vehicles there will be an increasing need for the consideration of safety in the design of streets and mobility networks, reducing risk, and supporting access for people of all ages and abilities. Rapidly Advancing Technologies Having the capacity to anticipate and respond to changing technologies will be a key feature of an integrated and comprehensive transportation system in the region. The following aspects of changing technologies should be considered. The growth of on-demand mobility services The importance of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) can be seen in the growth of on-demand mobility services (such as Uber or car-sharing services). Facilitated by the ability to access and share information in real time via smartphone or online, these services are helping to facilitate a new form of on-demand mobility for people who may not own a car or wish to drive. The growth of on-demand mobility services has the potential to both complement and challenge traditional servicebased mobility options - such as public transit and taxi services - by helping to fill gaps in existing areas of service, and at the same time providing greater choice for users. Creating the right balance between traditional servicebased transportation and on-demand services will become increasingly important. Oversight will be needed to ensure that there is a balance between the public good, equity, and safety objectives that were delivered through the regulation of traditional transportation services; and the greater mobility, freedom of choice, and convenience that are hallmarks of on-demand services. Another challenge arising from the growth of on-demand mobility services relates to the level of integration between these and more traditional transportation services. The line between public and private services is increasingly blurred, as many trips combine both. Government will need to redefine its role and find new ways of working with the private sector. Issues such as fare integration become even more complex when not only multiple jurisdictions are involved, but also public and private providers. The control of data an important commodity in the transportation system of the future has been a significant point of discussion between government and the private sector. GGH transportation planning will need to consider the integration of public and private, traditional, and on-demand services to ensure that they work together to form a seamless system accommodating the full spectrum of trips. The impact of automated vehicles (AVs) The introduction of AVs is on the immediate horizon, and in preparation, governments are developing legislation to support deployment. In January 2016, Ontario began allowing the testing of automated vehicles on-road, and in November 2016, MTO announced the first of three participants approved to be part of Ontario s Automated Vehicle Pilot. A growing list of U.S. states have enacted AV laws, including California, Nevada, Utah, Florida, Michigan, Tennessee, Arizona, and the District of Columbia. Automated vehicles are anticipated to bring many benefits such as improving safety, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving transportation equity for youth, seniors, and people with disabilities. They have the potential to help solve the persistent problem of the last mile between transit and homes, and may lead to increased road capacity as they are able to travel closer together than vehicles operated by human drivers. They FUTURE OUTLOOKS TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 57

also have the potential to shape communities by reducing the need for parking and freeing up this space for other uses. They will likely be transformational for the goods movement sector. There are also many challenges and uncertainties associated with the introduction of automated vehicles. They are likely to increase demand for trips due to convenience and the greater number of potential users. Depending on whether adoption primarily takes place under an ownership model or a shared, on-demand mobility model, the number of vehicles on streets could rise dramatically. The impact they will have on existing public transit systems is unclear, and will probably differ between lower-order (e.g. bus) and higher-order (e.g. commuter rail) transit. It is unknown whether the ability to sleep or be productive in the car will change people s tolerance for commuting, possibly leading to more dispersed land use patterns. The timeline of wide adoption is uncertain. There is a need to facilitate and guide a safe transition to automated vehicles while ensuring they support greater mobility and enhanced quality of life in the GGH. Automated vehicles could also have different impacts in different parts of the GGH. In denser areas, for example, they are likely to complement existing and future mass transit, in particular helping to solve the problem of the > Transit app on phone, Toronto - Technologies ranging from the more established open data transit apps, to emerging autonomous vehicles, offer insight into the future of transportation systems. > Uber autonomous mapping vehicle, Toronto - Uber has begun testing self-driving cars - that also collect mapping data - in a number of cities. last mile. In the GGH s smaller cities and rural areas, automated vehicles may have a larger role to play by filling the gap in areas where efficient and comprehensive transit is less viable. Strategies for how automated vehicles are incorporated into the overall transportation system will need to respond to these regional variations. A more connected system and vehicles A related emerging technology is that of connected vehicles (CV), which use wireless networks to communicate with other vehicles, personal mobile devices, and roadside infrastructure such as traffic signals, work zones, and toll booths. By sharing information about their location, speed, brake status, and more, CVs could dramatically reduce the number of collisions, reduce travel times, and improve energy efficiency. CVs can also collect better transportation-related information that can be used for analysis and planning. However, there are concerns about the security of the data shared and the possibility of hacking, which will require ongoing government regulation and oversight, and industry innovation to address. CVs are part of a larger shift in the transportation industry whereby the ICT systems used to support the transportation system will be as critical as the physical infrastructure across the GGH. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 55 will allow infrastructure, vehicles, and users to continuously share information and coordinate themselves in response. Users will be able to make informed decisions about when and how they travel, and to seamlessly combine modes to complete their 55 The integrated application of advanced computer, electronics, and communications technologies to increase the safety and efficiency of surface transportation is known as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), (https://www.standards.its.dot.gov/learnaboutstandards/glossary). 58 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

journey. The ability to access this information is becoming increasingly important. To adapt to these changes, there needs to be increased integration of transportation planning and ICT. In the GGH of the future, the system that moves people and goods will rely heavily on both, and the planning and decision making that takes place must be informed by both these technical and professional understandings. Automated vehicles and platoons are expected to change goods delivery patterns. Some observers expect that automated vehicles will be deployed first in the movement of goods, in part because they may be more easily adaptable to fleets that have large numbers of vehicles (thereby reducing the required numbers of vehicles, because they can be deployed more productively). While these vehicles have been road tested in some locations, the extent and timing of their deployment remains unclear, in particular because regulatory, liability, safety, and other considerations still must be worked out. Other related vehicle-to-vehicle communication technologies also have been tested. For example, multitruck platoons have been tested in Michigan, in which tractor-trailers are grouped together to run in a platoon at minimal spacing between vehicles, with the speed and operations controlled by the lead vehicle. The technology would allow a platoon to form or come apart as needed (e.g. one vehicle could leave the platoon at a certain expressway interchange, thereby minimizing or even avoiding the need to reconfigure the interchange in order to accommodate long-combination vehicles to carry the same load). Finally, automated manufacturing processes, such as 3-D printing, have the potential to change the shape of logistics for example, by allowing logistics providers to add customized components to standard products before making the final delivery. FUTURE OUTLOOKS > Hot and Fresh pizza delivery - A number of companies are exploring the use of drones to deliver products to consumers and businesses. TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 59

Other technologies that may impact delivery patterns Some retailers and distributors have started to test the use of drones that is, unmanned aerial vehicles - to deliver products to consumers and businesses alike. Amazon began testing drone delivery in the UK in December 2016, and UPS began testing in the U.S. in February 2017. In Canada, a company called Drone Delivery Canada is working with partners to develop, implement, and commercialize a drone delivery logistics platform for these partners, who comprise national businesses, and consumer retailers and distributors. These partners indicate that the drones could allow them to expand their existing logistical capabilities. The immediate aim is to develop and test applications in southern Ontario, Alberta and Québec, working within Transport Canada guidelines and frameworks. Other potential applications include the delivery of products and supplies to remote rural communities. 56 Other emerging technologies include the Hyperloop transport system, a futuristic mode of transportation based on the concept of propelling pod-like vehicles through reduced-pressure tubes. 56 http://www.dronedeliverycanada.com/news/ 60 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Appendix Figure 31. Mode share of all trips on an average weekday, by GGH city or region in 2011 APPENDIX 100 Mode Share by Daily Trips, 2011 80 60 40 20 Other Active Transit Auto 0 PD 1 of Toronto Rest of City of Toronto Durham Region York Region Peel Region Halton Region Hamilton Region GGH Region of City Niagara Region Waterloo Region City of Guelph Simcoe City of Peterborough City of Barrie Toronto s downtown core has the lowest automobile mode share in the region with just 35% of all trips made by car. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey Figure 32. GO Transit annual ridership Go Rail GO Bus Total 2006 38,138,094 10,608,306 48,746,400 2007 40,350,331 11,292,169 51,642,500 2008 42,549,451 12,348,249 54,897,700 2009 42,134,052 13,439,948 55,574,000 2010 43,684,000 14,179,100 57,863,100 2011 47,102,100 15,326,800 62,428,900 2012 48,100,000 16,600,000 64,700,000 2013 50,700,000 15,300,000 66,000,000 2014 54,200,000 14,500,000 68,700,000 2015 53,780,000 16,700,000 70,480,000 GO Transit annual ridership for both rail and bus increased from 2006 to 2015. Source: GO Transit Annual Ridership Report TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 61

Figure 33. Proportion of households owning 2+ vehicles in GGH municipalities, 1996-2011 Percentage of households that own 2+ vehicles 80 70 60 50 40 York Region Halton Region Durham Region Simcoe City of Barrie Niagara Region Waterloo Region City of Guelph Hamilton Region City of Peterborough City of Toronto 30 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year Between 1996 and 2011, the GGH witnessed a 5% increase in the percentage of households that owned two or more vehicles. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey Figure 34. Proportion of households owning 0 vehicles in GGH municipalities, 1996-2011 20 York Region Percentage of households that own 0 vehicles 15 10 5 Halton Region Peel Region Simcoe City of Barrie Niagara Region Waterloo Region City of Guelph Hamilton Region City of Peterborough City of Toronto 0 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year The percentage of households in the GGH owning 0 vehicles has decreased in the majority of GGH municipalities since 1996. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey 62 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 35. Percent of households that own 0 vehicles 20 Percentage of households that own 0 vehicles 15 10 5 City of Toronto GGH GTHA APPENDIX 0 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year While Toronto s percentage of households owning 0 vehicles is nearly 10% greater than the GGH as a whole, the downward trend suggests that car ownership is increasing. Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey Figure 36. Historical annual outbound cargo volumes by port between 2000 and 2016 2,500,000 Annual Outbound Cargo Tonnes by port 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 Hamilton Bowmanville Clarkson 500,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year The Port of Hamilton moves greatest annual volume of outbound cargo in tonnes followed closely by Bowmanville. Tonnage figures are limited to cargo volumes moved through the Seaway lock structures. Source: http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/ TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 63

Figure 37. Historical annual inbound cargo volumes by port between 2000 and 2016 12000000 Annual Inbound Cargo Tonnes by port 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 Hamilton Toronto Clarkson Oakville Bowmanville Oshawa 2,000,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year The Port of Hamilton receives by far the greatest annual volume of cargo in tonnes. Tonnage figures are limited to cargo volumes moved through the Seaway lock structures. Source: http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/seaway/facts/traffic/index.html Figure 38. Annual VIA Rail ridership 5,000,000 Annual System Passenger 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 System Passengers 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year VIA Rail s ridership has remained essentially unchanged since 2000. Source: VIA Annual Reports 64 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 39. Under 25 driver licence possession rates by region, 1986-2011 100 90 Durham Region York Region Halton Region Peel Region Percentage 80 70 Simcoe City of Barrie Niagara Region Waterloo Region City of Guelph Hamilton Region APPENDIX 60 50 City of Peterborough PD 1 of Toronto Rest of City of Toronto 40 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year Amongst persons aged 16 to 25, an overall decrease of 3% in the rate of driver s licence possession was observed across the GGH between 1986 and 2011 Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 65

Figure 40. Mode share of active transportation trips (walk, cycle) within regional municipalities on an average weekday, 1986-1996 (Table 1 of 2) Regional Municipality All Trips 1986 1991 1996 Active Trips Active Share All Trips Active Trips Active Share All Trips Active Trips Active Share City of Toronto 3,947,511 397,314 10% 4,160,294 363,478 9% 4,010,021 359,940 9% Durham Region 571,800 62,183 11% 681,035 40,081 6% 725,500 53,697 7% York Region 451,746 51,091 11% 644,712 53,750 8% 769,338 54,032 7% Peel Region 868,065 119,019 14% 1,109,005 94,079 8% 1,189,117 89,193 8% Halton Region 474,324 52,305 11% 494,711 40,809 8% 527,867 36,729 7% Hamilton Region 829,822 93,651 11% 804,449 68,705 9% 809,159 65,763 8% Niagara Region 200,985 14,092 7% 820,004 36,262 4% Waterloo Region 911,368 64,587 7% City of Guelph 181,383 17,365 10% Simcoe 98,075 8,972 9% City of Peterborough 155,953 11,071 7% City of Barrie 137,852 9,832 7% City of Orillia 34,632 4,894 14% Kawartha Lakes 11,393 537 5% Peterborough County 38,096 4,160 11% Wellington County Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey * 1986 and 1991 TTS covered the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) Note: TTS only includes walk and cycle trips if they were for work or school purposes, or were part of a complex tour with motorized modes (auto or transit). 66 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Figure 41. Mode share of active transportation trips (walk, cycle) within regional municipalities on an average weekday, 2001-2011 (Table 2 of 2) Regional Municipality All Trips 2001 2006 2011 Active Trips Active Share All Trips Active Trips Active Share All Trips Active Trips Active Share City of Toronto 4,184,745 377,060 9% 4,222,138 393,224 9% 4,561,492 458,085 10% Durham Region 837,259 59,506 7% 925,748 66,339 7% 1,003,278 59,296 6% York Region 1,056,693 62,612 6% 1,220,769 79,605 7% 1,492,403 82,184 6% Peel Region 1,501,329 102,907 7% 1,743,660 119,616 7% 2,002,094 123,068 6% APPENDIX Halton Region 604,973 37,612 6% 690,949 44,089 6% 777,029 44,257 6% Hamilton Region 877,238 67,063 8% 854,837 65,424 8% 877,566 58,751 7% Niagara Region 923,584 40,483 4% 939,169 38,005 4% 874,216 33,332 4% Waterloo Region 4,230 0% 1,027,385 70,093 7% 1,020,327 53,821 5% City of Guelph 213,855 19,460 9% 223,860 19,074 9% 224,559 14,748 7% Simcoe 127,530 10,895 9% 146,855 12,090 8% 153,447 8,965 6% City of Peterborough 164,758 11,822 7% 164,935 11,027 7% 162,856 9,956 6% City of Barrie 187,426 13,497 7% 233,652 15,040 6% 234,314 15,167 6% City of Orillia 54,031 4,467 8% 55,891 3,816 7% 58,059 3,869 7% Kawartha Lakes 92,119 5,286 6% 104,114 3,787 4% 99,890 2,589 3% Peterborough County Wellington County 11,025 373 3% 15,543 761 5% 12,633 286 2% 49,178 4,836 10% 46,594 4,041 9% 47,964 2,988 6% Source: Transportation Tomorrow Survey * 2001 TTS did not include Waterloo Region Note: TTS only includes walk and cycle trips if they were for work or school purposes, or were part of a complex tour with motorized modes (auto or transit). TRANSPORTATION PROFILE 67

Average Travel Speed Kilometres per Hour Many arterial roads within the GTHA, Niagara Region, and the cities of Barrie, Waterloo, Kitchener, Guelph, Brant, and Peterborough are very congested in the PM peak period. Figure 42. Traffic congestion across GGH arterials, SAFO, MTO Source: ATRI GPS Data 2015 & Land Information Ontario 68 GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE TRANSPORTATION PLAN